Discussion in 'NFL Zone' started by Skeptic, Aug 21, 2004.
I guess that rumor gets marked off the list after the Booker trade.
those characterizations tend to minimize the contributions of, IMO, the best o-line of their decade. funny, i can't disagree with the facts inherent. better living thru chemistry?
I don't disagree they were a great line but I take offense at people with Emmitt envy who discount his ability and accomplishments and say it was mostly because of his o-line. And I hear that from a lot of Dallas haters.
Guess who is one of the biggest proponents of the "it-wasn't-just-the-oline" theory? That Mike Irvin guy. He said a few years ago they were just a bunch of guys until they got Emmitt behind them. Nobody knew who those guys were. He was right.
hey, you had a good running game, but last season our D stopped that running game, imo, and controlled good runners all year...when you have a top defense, you don't fear RB's who aren't named Sanders or Tomlinson, etc.
My point was meant as a compliment to McNabb and Owens....you aren't going to beat us running the ball, unless it's McNabb running for huge plays. Your offense will go as McNabb and Owens go, which should be far. Now, give us a couple more lousy preseason efforts against the run, and I'll be fearing everyone's rb, but assuming the D can play as well as last year, I don't fear your RB's.
I think it is highly ironic that you posted an article that refutes your rather weak position that the loss of Buckhalter will not matter. Prisco is not the only writer that expected CB to see significant playing time.
Of course not. That is why you have repeatedly posted CB's stat line from the Dallas @ Philly game last year.
I think it's hilarious that you come into this newsgroup dumping your shate everywhere, only to step in it later. Thanks for the comic relief.
The article was about the NFL, not just Buckhalter/Westbrook. What does it matter that reporters thought that Buckhalter would have gotten more carries? Most writers only know as much as you or me, just because you say that Buckhalter would be getting 50% of the carries, doesn't make it true.
Within the last week (before the injury) I have stated many times over on the Eagles board that I would love to have a Buckhalter/ Miami's 2nd round pick for Ogunleye and then sign Levens. That shows how much I value him, he can be replaced easily.
I posted our rushing stats becuase our offensive line completely destroyed your defensive line run blocking. His 64 yard run was just a sprint, there was a huge hole for him to run though. All he had to do was outrun Roy Williams, Westbrook would have had the same success.
I am glad you are having a good time getting your @ss kicked in every arguement.
The article specifically stated that Buckhalter was favored to be the starter.
So the fact that you don't value CB is prima facie evidence that he will not be missed? The whole point of this discussion is that we disagree about whether CB will be missed. Offering up your opinion once again doesn't really help your case.
So is it your position that depth at RB is of no consequence? Perhaps the Eagles should just save the roster space and cut everyone but Westbrook.
Maybe if you made a point based on something other than your opinion, this would ring true. As it is, you appear to live in your own little world where QB's have thumbs that function as a sixth offensive lineman and a WCO OL's that gives up twice as many sacks as the average WCO qualifies as a good OL.
The fact is, you have some strange pretzel logic that allows you to make blatantly contradictory points and not see any problem with it. Now that 2/3 of the RB triumverate that you regaled us about is lost to the Eagles, apparently all the Eagles need is Westbrook and a couple of unproven backups. Even most Cowboys fans are only cautiously optimistic about Julius Jones, who has a much better pedigree than Reno Mahe or any of the other Eagles options at backup RB.
I don't really care if you think that losing Buckhalter will hurt the Eagles (that's your prerogative), but there's a reason that he was high on the depth chart and expected to get a share of the touches in 2004. It's disingenuous to suggest that his loss is meaningless.
The only reason I say anything to you is not for the sake of winning an argument with you but that you might realize why you have so little credibility.
Hey, AJM1613...don't let these guys give you a hard time...I mean there is always "next year", and the year after that, and the year after that, and the year after..., well, you know what I mean?
Anyways, in the mean time, if you want me to, I'll email you some pics of a SuperBowl trophy. You deserve it, by golly!
(BANG, SLAM, SHATTER)....
What was that noise? Oh, nevermind, it's just a window slamming shut!
We don't need any stinkin running backs!
Hey, Mkyle]Hey...(BANG, SLAM, SHATTER)What was that noise? .... Oh, nevermind, that was just Quincy Carter dropping his pipe in the C'boys locker room! Not to worry, Vinny will take you to the SB
LMAO...that was good Armeggdon Eagle(sp)...that was good!
If you posted an article that said the Cowboys would not make the playoffs, but the article was a prediction for the entire NFL, does your opinion change?
Buckhalter had 126 rushes for 542 yards last season (4.3 ypc), Levens had 75 rushes for 411 yards in 2002 (5.5 ypc). Levens had 19 catches in 2002, Buckhalter had 10.
Who was the more affective back? It's not opinion.
All I said was that if Westbrook had that carry, the result would have been the same, it wasn't like it was a Barry Sanders or even a Westbrook style run, it was a sprint. If Levens is fast enough, he could have made the same run, and it isn't that hard to be faster than Williams.
Let me explain something to you. A QUARTERBACK throws the football. Sometimes a QUARTERBACK holds on to the ball to long, causing a sack. McNabb's thumb injury had an affect on his confidence, he didn't think he could make good throws (and he really couldn't) so he held onto the ball longer. Just FYI
Good thing they don't need any cuz they aint got anybody.
"McNabb's thumb injury had an affect on his confidence, he didn't think he could make good throws (and he really couldn't) so he held onto the ball longer. Just FYI"
Whaaa! Someone call the waambulance! McThumb had a bad thumb!
Let's all give McThumb a drink of confidence....
Spin it, my man...it ain't nothing but the rent, and it's way past due! ;>)
has anybody caught Ronde Barber yet, b/c i think he's STILL running that interception back!
Was that an attempt at humor?
Good try, better luck next time.
get ready to hear that statement AGAIN come january.
You think Tampa is playing us again in the NFCCG? Or was that another attempt at humor?
wow, you're not too bright.
it's ok, you're a philly guy, so that was obvious.
"good try. better luck next time" THAT'S what you're gonna hear in january. not from tampa bay, dummy, just in general.
typically philly fan, more obessed with what dallas is up to than their own team. don't you have a couple knee rehabs you could be discussing on philly boards?
I have a couple of tips for you since your new. You are right, he isn't to bright. He won't go away that easily. And in case I forgot, welcome to the board!