You're just pulling our legs here, right? First of all, it's 17 (not 18) for 70. That's better than 4 yards per carry, and that's AFTER taking away his 3 huge runs. And you're arguing that that's BAD? McCoy had two (2) runs for zero or negative yards. They came on consecutive 1st- and 2nd-down plays. Yeah, they failed to convert on that single drive. The Chiefs stopped the run once.
Im not saying the Eagles run game was bad or unproductive.
Ok, then are you willing to agree that Eli and the Giants' passing attack controlled the Cowboys game, and the Giants beat themselves, making us, for all intensive purposes, an 0-2 team?
You're moving the goal posts now. You said: "He had a couple of big runs, but for the most part, the run game was shut down. The Eagles ended up in 2nd and third and long a lot b/c they failed to run the ball consistently. The Eagles did not end up in 2nd- and 3rd- and long because they failed to run consistently. I've shown that. You said that "they had a bunch of carries for nothing." They didn't. I've shown that. You said the Chiefs won by stopping the run. They didn't.
We just have different definitions of what shut down means. If you play Drew Brees and hold him to 290 yards, I would call that shutting him down. Its still a good productive game, but by his standards, thats shut down.
Holding Brees to 290 yards is in no way analogous to allowing McCoy and Vick to run for 250. What you're trying to argue is more comparable to saying that holding Brees to 400 yards is shutting him down.
Well, for one, I think you're too stuck with the numbers, but I don't really think that holding a spread read-option offense with two legit running threats in the backfield to 250 is the same as a guy throwing for 400. Not at all, so we just have a fundamental difference there.
I was correcting usage, not grammar. But you do have me curious (and unlike many, I do appreciate having my errors pointed out). What was wrong with my use of quotations? Obviously, I forgot an end-quote. But I don't see any other problems. Punctuation always inside the quotes: check. Punctuation not required when quoting fragments: check. Capitalize when the quote can stand as its own sentence, even when the quote is part of a larger sentence: check. Not seeing it.
Couldn't have said it better myself!
Usage/syntax/whatever all falls under the grammar category.
Thanks. You're absolutely right about the second quote: I should actually have used a comma (or colon) and deleted "that."
