Talib

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: Talib

    Wozzy, here's exactly what you said.  What it sounds like you're saying here is that Moss's skills didn't have as much to do with his success as  running more and play action which opened him up.  But if you look at the play by play, this simply isn't true.   I think you're letting your preconceived bias in favour of the run and "smashmouth" get in the way of facts here.  Sorry, but the run isn't a panacea. 

     We've had a bunch of fast guys since then, that's my point, in the NFL everybody is fast, deep passes happen because of play action and guile, not because of some physical advantage David Givens has over an opposing D back.  We ran early in 2007, which opened Moss up deep, the latter half of the season we ran less and less and eventually we started scoring less. 

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

    Re: Talib

    In response to wozzy's comment:

    In response to mthurl's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    I understand what you are saying - you run it and the safeties come in - then you can get a guy into less coverage deep. I think teams thought we didn't have someone to send deep. I think teams weren't worried about our running game. I think there is a real possibility that may change this year, but it is way too early to know. The bottom line is we didn't have one single guy we could put on the field last year at the skill position that ran under a 4.5....that matters.

     



    The play calling has been predictable, this according to opposing coaches and many analysts.  I might also add that Givens left New England and a year later he was out of football, David Patten left New England bounced around two teams with little production and was also gone... coaching is EVERYTHING in football.  Play calling will never receive the credit it deserves except to those highly paid coordinators who earned it.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    I agree to a point - although our offense has carried this team for five years I do think it was too pass heavy or predictable. I will say for the most part it worked...we moved the ball, we scored points, we converted on third downs and we won games against good teams. I and others had been saying for years that if you shut Welker down and leaned you coverages to the middle of the field, we'd be cooked. For the most part I think that happened to us against good defenses. I also think it makes it easier to stop the run when a defense is putting an emphasis on the center of the field (especially when your runners can NOT get outside).

    Truth is I like receivers that can play on the outside better than I like tight ends and slot guys that catch balls all day in the center. I don't think tight ends get the pass interference calls that receivers on the outside get. And I don't think sending a running back into the where everyone is waiting for them works. I think they did the best with what they had - I think they'll do the same this year. It's just a matter of what is on the roster. Honestly I'd rather have the offense you're referring to.

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

    Re: Talib

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

    Wozzy, here's exactly what you said.  What it sounds like you're saying here is that Moss's skills didn't have as much to do with his success as  running more and play action which opened him up.  But if you look at the play by play, this simply isn't true.   I think you're letting your preconceived bias in favour of the run and "smashmouth" get in the way of facts here.  Sorry, but the run isn't a panacea. 

    Getting Moss's considerable skills in a one on one matchup with a corner or just leaving him streaking down the field alone was primarily the product of a safety biting on a fake and Moss's considerable speed doing the rest, yes, I'm saying that.  

    Not to say there weren't some awesome "jump ball" catches because there were a whole bunch, but you don't score 50 TD's just because Randy Moss was a great athlete.  Randy Moss in Oakland was terrible, washed up.

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

    Re: Talib

    In response to mthurl's comment:

    In response to wozzy's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to mthurl's comment:

     

    [QUOTE]

     

     

    I understand what you are saying - you run it and the safeties come in - then you can get a guy into less coverage deep. I think teams thought we didn't have someone to send deep. I think teams weren't worried about our running game. I think there is a real possibility that may change this year, but it is way too early to know. The bottom line is we didn't have one single guy we could put on the field last year at the skill position that ran under a 4.5....that matters.

     

     



    The play calling has been predictable, this according to opposing coaches and many analysts.  I might also add that Givens left New England and a year later he was out of football, David Patten left New England bounced around two teams with little production and was also gone... coaching is EVERYTHING in football.  Play calling will never receive the credit it deserves except to those highly paid coordinators who earned it.

     

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    I agree to a point - although our offense has carried this team for five years I do think it was too pass heavy or predictable. I will say for the most part it worked...we moved the ball, we scored points, we converted on third downs and we won games against good teams. I and others had been saying for years that if you shut Welker down and leaned you coverages to the middle of the field, we'd be cooked. For the most part I think that happened to us against good defenses. I also think it makes it easier to stop the run when a defense is putting an emphasis on the center of the field (especially when your runners can NOT get outside).

     

    Truth is I like receivers that can play on the outside better than I like tight ends and slot guys that catch balls all day in the center. I don't think tight ends get the pass interference calls that receivers on the outside get. And I don't think sending a running back into the where everyone is waiting for them works. I think they did the best with what they had - I think they'll do the same this year. It's just a matter of what is on the roster. Honestly I'd rather have the offense you're referring to.

    [/QUOTE]

    I agree with everything you said but I hate the pass interference call, they're making the game to soft, too easy on receivers.  Covering a receiver has to be the toughest thing to do in football, you're the only one who doesn't know where the ball is going.  

    I enjoy playoff football because the refs let them jostle, mix it up, that's how it should be all the time.  Offense is fun to watch but it shouldn't be one sided, there will still be blowouts, the better teams will often ring up points, but they'll still have to earn it.

    I don't like sending a runningback into where everyone is either, unless I have Solder, Mankins, Connolly, Cannon and Vollmer moving as a unit to create holes, open seams, draw a defense in... then have Brady throw one over the top to Dobson. 

    This formula has stood the test of time; run/pass, yin/yang, there's symmetry to it, it creates rhythm, it gets an offense on first down streaks.  Yes you can win a Super Bowl with a pass heavy attack, but the odds are stacked so heavily against it, why would you want to play that style of football unless you enjoy scoring more than winning rings?

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

    Re: Talib

    In response to mthurl's comment:

     

    Antowain Smith ran a 4.45 at 225 pounds coming into the draft...he was drafted in the first round for a reason. A lot of players turn into busts in Buffalo - more like every player - it's what happens when you don't have qb's and coaches. Smith did plenty well...he ran with power, didn't fumble, could break tackles in close, and fit what we were trying to do here.

    I like that reports are saying Boyce is starting to look better too. To me he is a guy with some dynamic traits - he runs smooth, has deep speed, but is built like a running back.

    I like that there is young legs on the outside right now, some of these guys will develop...the QB is too good to not let that happen. Young guys are going to make mistakes, but maybe they dumb it down a bit and try to build on it as they go.

     




    Agreed...I think it was ESPN Boston that had the comment that these new receivers all look far larger than last years...just very obvious when looking at them....and that Dobson and Boyce have incredible downfiled speed and are real burners compared to what's been here recently...I like that very, very much....now if TB can just air it out a bit we might have something special...I hope it's just that TB isn't used to such deep speed that he's been throwing short on alot of his deep throws so far...

     

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from mthurl. Show mthurl's posts

    Re: Talib

    In response to wozzy's comment:

    In response to mthurl's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to wozzy's comment:

     

    [QUOTE]

     

     

    In response to mthurl's comment:

     

     

    [QUOTE]

     

     

     

    I understand what you are saying - you run it and the safeties come in - then you can get a guy into less coverage deep. I think teams thought we didn't have someone to send deep. I think teams weren't worried about our running game. I think there is a real possibility that may change this year, but it is way too early to know. The bottom line is we didn't have one single guy we could put on the field last year at the skill position that ran under a 4.5....that matters.

     

     

     



    The play calling has been predictable, this according to opposing coaches and many analysts.  I might also add that Givens left New England and a year later he was out of football, David Patten left New England bounced around two teams with little production and was also gone... coaching is EVERYTHING in football.  Play calling will never receive the credit it deserves except to those highly paid coordinators who earned it.

     

     

     

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    I agree to a point - although our offense has carried this team for five years I do think it was too pass heavy or predictable. I will say for the most part it worked...we moved the ball, we scored points, we converted on third downs and we won games against good teams. I and others had been saying for years that if you shut Welker down and leaned you coverages to the middle of the field, we'd be cooked. For the most part I think that happened to us against good defenses. I also think it makes it easier to stop the run when a defense is putting an emphasis on the center of the field (especially when your runners can NOT get outside).

     

     

    Truth is I like receivers that can play on the outside better than I like tight ends and slot guys that catch balls all day in the center. I don't think tight ends get the pass interference calls that receivers on the outside get. And I don't think sending a running back into the where everyone is waiting for them works. I think they did the best with what they had - I think they'll do the same this year. It's just a matter of what is on the roster. Honestly I'd rather have the offense you're referring to.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    I agree with everything you said but I hate the pass interference call, they're making the game to soft, too easy on receivers.  Covering a receiver has to be the toughest thing to do in football, you're the only one who doesn't know where the ball is going.  

     

    I enjoy playoff football because the refs let them jostle, mix it up, that's how it should be all the time.  Offense is fun to watch but it shouldn't be one sided, there will still be blowouts, the better teams will often ring up points, but they'll still have to earn it.

    I don't like sending a runningback into where everyone is either, unless I have Solder, Mankins, Connolly, Cannon and Vollmer moving as a unit to create holes, open seams, draw a defense in... then have Brady throw one over the top to Dobson. 

    This formula has stood the test of time; run/pass, yin/yang, there's symmetry to it, it creates rhythm, it gets an offense on first down streaks.  Yes you can win a Super Bowl with a pass heavy attack, but the odds are stacked so heavily against it, why would you want to play that style of football unless you enjoy scoring more than winning rings?

    [/QUOTE]

    Yeah it's different in the playoffs for sure and I like it, I think it helps our own defense out quite a bit too. Looking forward to seeing how this offense will...I will need to remind myself to be patient.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from mthurl. Show mthurl's posts

    Re: Talib

    In response to russgriswold's comment:

    In response to wozzy's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to mthurl's comment:

     

    In response to wozzy's comment:

     

     

    In response to mthurl's comment:

     

     

     

     

    I understand what you are saying - you run it and the safeties come in - then you can get a guy into less coverage deep. I think teams thought we didn't have someone to send deep. I think teams weren't worried about our running game. I think there is a real possibility that may change this year, but it is way too early to know. The bottom line is we didn't have one single guy we could put on the field last year at the skill position that ran under a 4.5....that matters.

     

     

     



    The play calling has been predictable, this according to opposing coaches and many analysts.  I might also add that Givens left New England and a year later he was out of football, David Patten left New England bounced around two teams with little production and was also gone... coaching is EVERYTHING in football.  Play calling will never receive the credit it deserves except to those highly paid coordinators who earned it.

     

     

     

     



    I agree to a point - although our offense has carried this team for five years I do think it was too pass heavy or predictable. I will say for the most part it worked...we moved the ball, we scored points, we converted on third downs and we won games against good teams. I and others had been saying for years that if you shut Welker down and leaned you coverages to the middle of the field, we'd be cooked. For the most part I think that happened to us against good defenses. I also think it makes it easier to stop the run when a defense is putting an emphasis on the center of the field (especially when your runners can NOT get outside).

     

     

    Truth is I like receivers that can play on the outside better than I like tight ends and slot guys that catch balls all day in the center. I don't think tight ends get the pass interference calls that receivers on the outside get. And I don't think sending a running back into the where everyone is waiting for them works. I think they did the best with what they had - I think they'll do the same this year. It's just a matter of what is on the roster. Honestly I'd rather have the offense you're referring to.



    I agree with everything you said but I hate the pass interference call, they're making the game to soft, too easy on receivers.  Covering a receiver has to be the toughest thing to do in football, you're the only one who doesn't know where the ball is going.  

     

    I enjoy playoff football because the refs let them jostle, mix it up, that's how it should be all the time.  Offense is fun to watch but it shouldn't be one sided, there will still be blowouts, the better teams will often ring up points, but they'll still have to earn it.

    I don't like sending a runningback into where everyone is either, unless I have Solder, Mankins, Connolly, Cannon and Vollmer moving as a unit to create holes, open seams, draw a defense in... then have Brady throw one over the top to Dobson. 

    This formula has stood the test of time; run/pass, yin/yang, there's symmetry to it, it creates rhythm, it gets an offense on first down streaks.  Yes you can win a Super Bowl with a pass heavy attack, but the odds are stacked so heavily against it, why would you want to play that style of football unless you enjoy scoring more than winning rings?

     




    Stop being so rational, Wozzy. I really do think some here love all the fireworks during the regular season and enjoy living on the edge in January, hoping Brady can come out the other side with gaudy stats, regardless. It's been a really strange thing to watch for me as a fan.

     

    I just cannot figure out why some would want to watch that happen again.

    The whole beauty of the Weis style offense is that it was very methodical and anything in that playbook was on the table.  It was two fold.  Lure the opposing D into a false sense of security, set them up, and then pull out that one play that would surprise the heck out of them,  and pounce.  It's why our dynasty era teams used to pull away in second halves, in total control the whole time, even if the game was not a blowout. It's because we woudln't turn it over and that helped our D.

    We used to run our offense like that and our D.   They were chameleons from week to week.

    From 2007-2012, we tried to get all the new and young players up to speed on D, with varying results, but we ignored the approach with that chameleonesque style on offense.  People say we change our style on offense from week to week, still, but that really isn't true. We intentionally ignored it, and I just can't figure out why.   You know I have my theories, but it's just beyond ridiculous. Every excuse on the planet has been posted here, from "BJGE is not a star RB and not Jim Brown, so we shouldn't used a lead back" right on down to blaming our D for not guaranteeing a minimum of 2 turnovers created in low scoring games.

    Regardless of the past, our D will look MUCH better with whatever this offense morphs into this year, even if the offense starts off a little slow. 

    [/QUOTE]

    The last paragraph had better be true....no more excuses, no more "we are rebuilding on the fly", no more wait till next year, no more be patient, no more "you can't expect them all to be pro bowlers"....it's now. Enough is enough.

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

    Re: Talib

    In response to russgriswold's comment:

     




    Stop being so rational, Wozzy. I really do think some here love all the fireworks during the regular season and enjoy living on the edge in January, hoping Brady can come out the other side with gaudy stats, regardless. It's been a really strange thing to watch for me as a fan.

     

     

    I just cannot figure out why some would want to watch that happen again.

    The whole beauty of the Weis style offense is that it was very methodical and anything in that playbook was on the table.  It was two fold.  Lure the opposing D into a false sense of security, set them up, and then pull out that one play that would surprise the heck out of them,  and pounce.  It's why our dynasty era teams used to pull away in second halves, in total control the whole time, even if the game was not a blowout. It's because we woudln't turn it over and that helped our D.

    We used to run our offense like that and our D.   They were chameleons from week to week.

    From 2007-2012, we tried to get all the new and young players up to speed on D, with varying results, but we ignored the approach with that chameleonesque style on offense.  People say we change our style on offense from week to week, still, but that really isn't true. We intentionally ignored it, and I just can't figure out why.   You know I have my theories, but it's just beyond ridiculous. Every excuse on the planet has been posted here, from "BJGE is not a star RB and not Jim Brown, so we shouldn't used a lead back" right on down to blaming our D for not guaranteeing a minimum of 2 turnovers created in low scoring games.

    Regardless of the past, our D will look MUCH better with whatever this offense morphs into this year, even if the offense starts off a little slow. 



    The last paragraph had better be true....no more excuses, no more "we are rebuilding on the fly", no more wait till next year, no more be patient, no more "you can't expect them all to be pro bowlers"....it's now. Enough is enough.

     

     



    Brady has been poor or mediocre in postseasons for a long time now, dating back to 2007. So, it didn't really matter if our D ranked 7th then or 31st (based on yards in the air) in 2011.

     

    You don't seem to get it.  And, we were rebuilding on the fly. We didn't set aside a committed 5 years to do it right like a SF, Seattle, Atlanta, or any of these current well run franchises did. We didn't have that amount of time afforded to us.  If Brady had retired after 2009 or we traded him, you would have seen a 5 year committed rebuild program like what GB did starting in 2006 with Rodgers as the long term solution, no big contracts, load up on picks and strategic FA moves.

    BB didn't have that luxury because Brady was in his prime still. So, we did rebuild on the fly. You'd have to be on the short bus to not admit that's what this was.  Absolutely. It was brilliant. In the middle of it we were in the SB, off a lockout. Brilliant.  If Brady and/or Welker played better in that 4th, and others on offense, or if our D could have bailed out the mistakes of the offense on those last 4 drives, we're talking about a possible formation of a new dynasty.  Not saying it would happen at all, but we'd be looking at making another SB run, just 2 years removed from SB 46.

    He traded into 2010, 2011 and 2012s drafts to secure the youth movement so there would be limited risk with larger contracts across the roster.

    You seem to think you can snap a finger with teambuilding and that because #12 trots out there, he's owed superstar personnel at every position all around him. That's pretty arrogant considering it's a cap era, FA exists and it's about 53 players. This isn't the NBA.  And, the fact is, it's been proven, you need all 53, well budgeted, because Tom Brady isn't great enough to do it all himself. 

    I told you back in 2009 to be prepared for some bumps, because there was no way BB would go out and risk buying exerienced, quality FAs on defense going into a lockout. You ignored it and spent years here completely ignoring what he was doing and the economic landscape when, our BEST players, our most expensive players on OFFENSE underperformed.

    Enough is enough is right.  Your own comments above come off very entitled, too. My fear is that your attitude has been Brady's.  My fear.

    We'll see.

    Like I've said here before, I would not be surprised if BB had a little awkward chat with Brady at the end of another poor AFC title game for him and the offense.  Brady restructured for his little buddy, but it's pretty clear BB wasn't on board anymore.



    When Belichick said they have made mistakes bringing in people...lots of them, last week, did you think he was kidding? If you think it takes five years to rebuild a defense (when you have the best defensive mind in football) you are insane...certifiable. You are the same guy who praised Patrick Chung for Christ's sake! Bawahahaha!! Who does that? Here was a guy who couldn't cover a bed with a blanket...who quit on his team and you absolutely praised him. Meanwhile the other safety on his very same team, in the very same draft, gets drafted later and turns into one the best safeties in the game. You just can't make this stuff up.

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: Talib

     

    One of the myths here is that play action is the only way to get a safety to go to the wrong place.  The Pats run lots of combination routes that do the same thing.  You just need to get guys in single coverage.  You can do that by getting the right combinations of routes too.  Most of us don't have nearly the sophisticated understanding of the game that BB and his coordinators have and therefore we repeat simplistic things about play action and run pass balance.  This isn't high school football we're watching.  Belichick, O'Brien, McDaniels all know a heck of a lot more about football than Rusty or Wozzy or me.  I trust them to be making the right calls and not overlooking "time-tested" cliches about run-pass balance.  C'mon, do you really think BB forgot about balance and screwed up for half a decade passing too much? It just boggles my mind that people can be arguing that.  

     

    BB is arguably the best coach in NFL history.  He's not making basic mistakes.  If he's running shotgun 40% of the time there's a good reason for it.  It's not some kind of brainfart.

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from tcal2-. Show tcal2-'s posts

    Re: Talib

     

    Balance works great when Corey Dillon or Antowain Smith are your running Backs.

     

    It doesn't work at all when Maronry, BJGE or Ridley is your feature backs.  That's what I'm saying.  When you have 2nd/3rd tier RB's handling the ball, you need an outside the numbers passing game to open extra space for them.

     Don't care what anyone says.  If you hand the ball 30+ times a game, every game,  to a 2nd/3rd tier RB without having a really good outside the #’s WR's you’re going to losing 1/2 your games.

     

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from Philskiw1. Show Philskiw1's posts

    Re: Talib

    The run sets up the pass and the pass sets up the run. The one neglected part is the O line. The o line can cover for things and it can expose things too.  Brady has always had a fantastic O line. For the guy to stand there in the pocket like he does says something about how much he trusts them. 

    i think their more a pass blocking line then a run blocking line and that's hurt the running game with serviceable backs and below.  You have a Dillion or an AP and the Oline gets some slack. In 2007 the giants dared us to pass the ball cause when we run effective it's behind mankins. Mankins was hurt soi think they rushed 4 and disguised blitzes.  Brady didnt have time to take a breath. IMO he needs to dictate the game tempo and he's deadly. 

    Maybe cannon and mankins can give us that pulling guard that will make our run game respected this year.

    Now you got the easy part done telling me about it.

    Does that handshaped bruise on your back hurt?

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

    Re: Talib

    In response to russgriswold's comment:

     


    Here you go again, I didn't "praise" Chung.



    Yes you did, liar.

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from Philskiw1. Show Philskiw1's posts

    Re: Talib

    In response to russgriswold's comment:

    In response to Philskiw1's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    The run sets up the pass and the pass sets up the run. The one neglected part is the O line. The o line can cover for things and it can expose things too.  Brady has always had a fantastic O line. For the guy to stand there in the pocket like he does says something about how much he trusts them. 

    i think their more a pass blocking line then a run blocking line and that's hurt the running game with serviceable backs and below.  You have a Dillion or an AP and the Oline gets some slack. In 2007 the giants dared us to pass the ball cause when we run effective it's behind mankins. Mankins was hurt soi think they rushed 4 and disguised blitzes.  Brady didnt have time to take a breath. IMO he needs to dictate the game tempo and he's deadly. 

    Maybe cannon and mankins can give us that pulling guard that will make our run game respected this year.

    Now you got the easy part done telling me about it.

    Does that handshaped bruise on your back hurt?

     



    Our run game ranked 6th or 7th in the NFL last year. What on earth?

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Our lead back had 4 games with over 100 yards.  Tenn,buff,Denver and STL.   Not so much against anyone good. The teams that were better rushing then us.  Wash, SF and Seattle.  running QBs, is that power running? Then there's the Vikings , chiefs and buffalo. They had no qb and had to run. So our 7 th ranking IMO is a facad and our running game needs better blocking to be considered a threat by other teams. Don't forget Ridley put the ball on the ground 6 times    

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: Talib

    In response to tcal2-'s comment:

     

    Balance works great when Corey Dillon or Antowain Smith are your running Backs.

     

    It doesn't work at all when Maronry, BJGE or Ridley is your feature backs.  That's what I'm saying.  When you have 2nd/3rd tier RB's handling the ball, you need an outside the numbers passing game to open extra space for them.

     Don't care what anyone says.  If you hand the ball 30+ times a game, every game,  to a 2nd/3rd tier RB without having a really good outside the #’s WR's you’re going to losing 1/2 your games.

     


    Running makes sense when your defense is good.  People talk about "complementary" football here all the time, but too few seem to understand what that really means.  Running a lot tends to reduce scoring.  If you do that, your defense better be strong. Back in 2001 (by year end), 2003, and 2004 it was strong.  Recently, it hasn't been nearly as strong.     Anybody who watched the Indy game a few years ago where Dan f'n Orlovsky tore our secondary apart in the second half understands why BB was reluctant to try a lower scoring ball control approach, even when we had good leads.

     

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

    Re: Talib

    In response to russgriswold's comment:

     


    Our run game ranked 6th or 7th in the NFL last year. What on earth?

     


    Our run game was below the league average in ypc last year.

     

     

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

    Re: Talib

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:

     

    In response to russgriswold's comment:

     

     


    Our run game ranked 6th or 7th in the NFL last year. What on earth?

     Our run game was below the league average in ypc last year.

     

     

     

    RK TEAM ATT YDS YDS/A LONG TD YDS/G FUM FUML 1 Washington 519 2709 5.2 76 22 169.3 13 5 2 Minnesota 486 2634 5.4 82 16 164.6 9 6 3 Seattle 536 2579 4.8 77 16 161.2 7 3 4 San Francisco 492 2491 5.1 50 17 155.7 11 3 5 Kansas City 500 2395 4.8 91 9 149.7 11 9 6 Buffalo 442 2217 5.0 62 12 138.6 7 6 7 New England 523 2184 4.2 47 25 136.5 6 3 8 Houston 508 2123 4.2 81 19 132.7 5 3 9 Carolina 462 2088 4.5 72 21 130.5 8 4 10 Chicago470 1970 4.2 46 11 123.1 4 2

     


     

     

     




     

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from tcal2-. Show tcal2-'s posts

    Re: Talib

    In response to russgriswold's comment:

    In response to tcal2-'s comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

     

    Balance works great when Corey Dillon or Antowain Smith are your running Backs.

     

    It doesn't work at all when Maronry, BJGE or Ridley is your feature backs.  That's what I'm saying.  When you have 2nd/3rd tier RB's handling the ball, you need an outside the numbers passing game to open extra space for them.

     Don't care what anyone says.  If you hand the ball 30+ times a game, every game,  to a 2nd/3rd tier RB without having a really good outside the #’s WR's you’re going to losing 1/2 your games.

     

     




    Antowain Smith was a BUST in Buffalo and was cut. Smith failed conditioning tests here. He's nowhear Dillon level.

     

    Dillon had HOF production on the worst team in the NFL.

    Please don't say Antowain Smith is on a Corey Dillon level. Your NFL knowledge is so awful, it's hilarious.

    You're in your 50s you said? My god.  Find a new hobby or sport to follow.

    [/QUOTE]

    You have extremely poor reading comprehension.  You’re in your Teens, right?  Try to Find a friend or step outside once in awhile.


     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: Talib

    In response to russgriswold's comment:

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to russgriswold's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

     

     


    Our run game ranked 6th or 7th in the NFL last year. What on earth?

     

     

     

     

     


    Our run game was below the league average in ypc last year.

     

     

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Yet,  I just watched Terrell Davis say on NFLN yesterday say that YPC is very deceiving. You going to argue with Terrell Davis on that topic, are ya?

     

    Get over it.

    He was talking about DeMarco Murray's high YPC average but the Dallas run game not being very good overall.

    Exposed.

    [/QUOTE]


    By your own words he's talking about an INDIVIDUAL'S average dumbkoff.

    You are even more dense than usual. Have you been drinking?

    I refuse to believe you graduated from any college. No college in America's standards could be that low. University of Phoenix would probably reject you.

     

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from wozzy. Show wozzy's posts

    Re: Talib

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Running makes a defense better, it doesn't only make sense if your "defense is good"  That is complementary football.  

    The team ran the ball in 2010 and O'Brien decided to stop running in the playoffs.  If you wanted to say we had no RB depth behind Law Firm that might have made sense but blaming the defense... oh yeah I forgot, we blame the defense for everything.

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from mthurl. Show mthurl's posts

    Re: Talib

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:

     

    In response to russgriswold's comment:

     

     


    Here you go again, I didn't "praise" Chung.

     



    Yes you did, liar.

     

     




    I missed his whole "post" it was removed, but did he really just say he didn't praise Chung?? He didn't?!!!

     

    This was the guy that claimed Chung changed the defense when he was man enough to actually put on his shoulder pads and get out there. He said that, and he was right, he did "change" the defense, he made it worse. You want to have 20 yards in between zones when there is supposed to be 10? Chung is your man!! You want to have your reveivers bounce off an undersized safety? Chung is it! You want to demolish a safety when he comes up into the box? Chung was made for that. You want a bad attitude quiter on your team? Bring on Chung. Everybody Wang Chung tonight!!! I wonder if Chung auditioned for the roll of Elijah Price in Unbreakable? Darn Samual L. Jackson for wrestling it away from him like a receiver going for the ball:( 

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from tcal2-. Show tcal2-'s posts

    Re: Talib

    In response to wozzy's comment:

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Running makes a defense better, it doesn't only make sense if your "defense is good"  That is complementary football.  

    The team ran the ball in 2010 and O'Brien decided to stop running in the playoffs.  If you wanted to say we had no RB depth behind Law Firm that might have made sense but blaming the defense... oh yeah I forgot, we blame the defense for everything.



    No, Just for not being able to make a last drive stop in the last 2 Super Bowls. 

    But to be fair if BJGE in a run formation (with a lead blocker even) can run for anything but negative yardage and if Welker 2 plays later cataches the ball instead of crapping his pants it never would of had to come down to the defense in 46.

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from mthurl. Show mthurl's posts

    Re: Talib

    In response to russgriswold's comment:

     

    Unreal. My response to you was deleted so you could continue to troll and be protected. 

    Anyway, yes, when Spikes and Chung returned late in 2011, I said to wait to judge the D then. That's all I ever said about Chung's presence on the D. Ever.  I said he was physical, but injury prone and would need to have a knockout 2012 to even be considered to be resigned. Yes. That's exactly what I said.  Just because I didn't sit behind a computer acting like he was the worst player in the NFL doesn't mean I "praised" Chung.

    Comically, Spikes and Chung both had really good postseasons in 2011. So, when they did return there was a clear difference. Spikes INT on Flacco should have easily put the game away, but Brady.....Brady had other ideas.

    It was Brady and Welker who let us down in the 4th qtr of SB 46, too, obviously.  Ironic. The cheapest players outplayed our most expensive ones in the 2011 postseason.

    I wonder if Brady will be better in 2013's postseason so we can stop pretending the non stars on the field are more resonsible than Tom "GOAT" Brady?

     

     



    You did more than say he was "physical, but injury prone"...way more. You loved the guy - he was the guy who shut down Victor Cruz according to you...he was the guy that shut down Antonio Gates "all by himself". LMAO!! And he had to have a "knockout 2012" to be brought back? Why is that if he wasn't the joke we were telling you he was while you were in love and defending the guy? 

     

    I know you being exposed, made fun of, laughed at, embarrassed daily is depressing for you, but get over it. It's not like it's anything new:)  You got to admit you are pretty pathetic though.

    By the way Spikes will have to have more than a "knockout 2013" to be brought back. Just another second round pick that there will be no attempt to bring back...is it to soon to cut Tavon Wilson yet? 

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from wozzy. Show wozzy's posts

    Re: Talib

    In response to tcal2-'s comment:

    No, Just for not being able to make a last drive stop in the last 2 Super Bowls. 

    But to be fair if BJGE in a run formation (with a lead blocker even) can run for anything but negative yardage and if Welker 2 plays later cataches the ball instead of crapping his pants it never would of had to come down to the defense in 46.



    If the defense doesn't stop the Giants offense after Brady throws an INT to start the 4th quarter they Giants really could have piled on, but they did.  

    But considering the Patriot offense scored a minute into the third than couldn't even convert a first down for the remainder of the 3rd quarter and THE ENTIRE 4TH QUARTER I guess it wouldn't have mattered.  

    The Patriots offense scored 14 points in 07' and 17 points in 2011... that sux, that was the offense's fault.  Period.

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from tcal2-. Show tcal2-'s posts

    Re: Talib

    In response to wozzy's comment:

     

    In response to tcal2-'s comment:

     

     

     

    No, Just for not being able to make a last drive stop in the last 2 Super Bowls. 

    But to be fair if BJGE in a run formation (with a lead blocker even) can run for anything but negative yardage and if Welker 2 plays later cataches the ball instead of crapping his pants it never would of had to come down to the defense in 46.

     

     



    If the defense doesn't stop the Giants offense after Brady throws an INT to start the 4th quarter they Giants really could have piled on, but they did.  

     

     

    But considering the Patriot offense scored a minute into the third than couldn't even convert a first down for the remainder of the 3rd quarter and THE ENTIRE 4TH QUARTER I guess it wouldn't have mattered.  

    The Patriots offense scored 14 points in 07' and 17 points in 2011... that sux, that was the offense's fault.  Period.

     



    Too bad our offense had to play great and peaking defenses in 07 and 11.  Our offense easily would of hung 40 against our chitty defense if they had the luxury of playing against them.  

    But why give any credit to the other team who came in both times with the superior defense and coaching.

    oh, by the way our offense got last minute leads against excellent defenses only to watch our crappy defense fold like origami both times......and that's a fact.

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from tcal2-. Show tcal2-'s posts

    Re: Talib

    In response to russgriswold's comment:

     

    In response to tcal2-'s comment:

     

     

     

    In response to wozzy's comment:

     

     

     

     

    In response to tcal2-'s comment:

     

     

     

     

     

     

    No, Just for not being able to make a last drive stop in the last 2 Super Bowls. 

    But to be fair if BJGE in a run formation (with a lead blocker even) can run for anything but negative yardage and if Welker 2 plays later cataches the ball instead of crapping his pants it never would of had to come down to the defense in 46.

     

     

     

     



    If the defense doesn't stop the Giants offense after Brady throws an INT to start the 4th quarter they Giants really could have piled on, but they did.  

     

     

     

     

    But considering the Patriot offense scored a minute into the third than couldn't even convert a first down for the remainder of the 3rd quarter and THE ENTIRE 4TH QUARTER I guess it wouldn't have mattered.  

    The Patriots offense scored 14 points in 07' and 17 points in 2011... that sux, that was the offense's fault.  Period.

     

     

     



    Too bad our offense had to play great and peaking defenses in 07 and 11.  Our offense easily would of hung 40 against our chitty defense if they had the luxury of playing against them.  

     

     

     

    But why give any credit to the other team who came in both times with the superior defense and coaching.

     

     



    Is that English or dyslexia? I can see why you are afraid to type or communicate much.

     

     

     

     



    iPad auto corrects and will run words together if you don't watch it closely.  It's messed up.  What can I clear up for you?  

     

     

Share