Terence Newman

[PBJTime]

The only thing that's like a train wreck is watching you reappear only to get derailed. :laugh2:

You can't stop reading my posts I just keep reeling you back in like a dried up carp. Dude, you have some real issues.

You said you had me on ignore and what a beautiful thing it is and here you are back again. This is just another dagger in your credibility.

You're making this far too easy for me all I have to do is sit back and watch you self destruct. LOL
You expect anyone to believe that BS? Your credibility is shot! You put me on ignore and took me right off just to make it appear you weren't reading my posts....BUSTED! LOL

You've been following me around for several days then claimed you put me on ignore and now you're back AGAIN for the 10th time and you're claiming I'm in your head?

Classic ad hominem. Do you know what that is? It's a flaw in logic. That's a fact.

Ignore doesn't block out the quotes. I didn't read your quotes. I saw "PBJ" like a bright neon sign in one of your posts and it caught my attention. Simple question. Did you or did you not drop my name when replying to another poster?

Right, everyone is beating up on me. :laugh2: You're so delusional it's hilarious! Go seek some counseling.

The fact is, you're the only one who doesn't realize you're getting schooled here. Ironically enough, that is very delusional in and of itself.

I told you to post an article with either speculation or fact that Newman's struggles in coverage were due to him not being healthy.

No, your exact words were, "You claim he's injured but you haven't produced one article that says he's currently not healthy." Also, the VERY FIRST article was exactly about how he probably shouldn't have played because of injury. You can't be serious...

And you accused me of not being able to comprehend? LOL Most of those articles were during the first week in Nov.

Refer to your quote. I comprehended just fine. I just didn't apply the "currently" as it was inappropriate for the discussion.

His ankle has been fine for weeks. Dez had recurring problems with both his ankles and still performed at a high level...NEXT!

This is another classic logical fallacy called, "proof by example." This is an example of a flimsy argument. That is a fact. You can't apply the same thing across the board based on a few examples. But, don't take my word for it, look it up yourself.

Posting articles from early Nov when he hurt his ankle isn't going to defend all the times he got beat weeks before and after that.

How many times was that, exactly? I'm not necessarily arguing this point, but if you are going to assert something like "all the times he got beat weeks before and after that", you better have some ammo to back it up. I'm talking some stats with a reference point. Otherwise, this is also a lazy attempt at a point.

You're going to blame an ankle injury that happened in early Nov as the reason he got beat by Desean Jackson over a month later?...NEXT!

This is easy. ANY ankle injury can take at least 4-6 weeks for full recovery. I don't have to be his personal PT to know that, as some things are relatively constant. There's a reason 95% of my ACL, TKA, THA, etc. patients follow the EXACT same respective exercise protocols. It's because typical musculoskeletal injuries follow typical patterns. I don't expect you to understand this. Everybody brings something to the table. Knowledge in this area is what I bring.

When he shut down Jackson all of last year, then I question how you could honestly think a year of aging process is the determining factor.

His play has diminished because he's an older player in decline and because we've had serious issues at safety.

Less than a year of the aging process separates a Pro Bowl player from the scrap heap? Issues at safety are a huge, and I've never disputed that, but injury is obviously the more likely culprit.

Dez's play didn't diminished after he tweaked the ankle he suffered a high ankle sprain on and his play didn't diminish after he injured his ribs and hurt his other ankle.

Again, proof by example. It's flawed logic. There's no way around it. You can't say because you see one or a few red apples, that it proves ALL apples are red. Get it, yet?

As for Newman playing pretty well the other night that just confirms he's fine. I'm sure if he gets torched by Philly next Sunday you'll start blaming injuries again. LOL

Wrong. It only confirms that he played fine. Also, more time has elapsed since injury. Coincidence? It sounds as if you're trying to imply that because he played fine this week, he must have been healthy all season. Say it isn't so.

It proves the injuries he suffered were minor. The Cowboys won't play a player if they're injured to the point that they can't be affective....NEXT!

If you read the first article (I know how you love articles), it states that Phillips feels as if he made a mistake letting Newman play. A minor injury can still have major consequences.

Also teams let injured players play ALL THE TIME, even if it hampers play. If they feel the injured player is better than any other option, then they play them. Who do you feel should have taken Newman's spot and why aren't you on the coaching staff?

Alot of players play with an injury but teams won't play a player if they're injury prevents them from being affective.

If a player is so injured they can't be affective you're better off with a lesser player who's healthy. This happened to Revis earlier this season with a hammy.

He wasn't affective and the Jets pulled him and rested him the following week.

If the Cowboys thought it was injuries that were causing Newman to get beat he wouldn't have been playing...NEXT!

You know this from fact, or is another one of your lame arguments? Do you have any knowledge or insight as to what goes on, especially on a team that is shallow in the CB position?

Again, please quit bringing up other players as proof by example. How many errors in logic is that now? 4?

Go find a post with the thread LINK where I said a player who plays on any given Sunday is automatically not injured.

FYI, it was posed as a question. However, you did say this:

"The fact that he hasn't missed a start all season and has been playing is proof he's not injured."

You claim that by Newman not missing a start, that is PROOF that he is not injured. Your words. I was simply asking if you can apply logic across the board or does that just apply to Newman, because I wanted to know.

You're stooping to putting words in my mouth. If a player can jump, run and tackle without showing any signs of discomfort or being limited they're not injured in my book.

Nope, quoted you and asked a question.

They're certain injuries a player can play with and play affectively with. You haven't come up with anything that proves injuries have caused Newman to get beat repeatedly this season. Jenkins has been beaten repeatedly too is it because he's injured? LOL

Really? I'd really like to know your expert opinion on this. Let's see what you really know about injuries. Because I can assure you, I know what I'm talking about.

Newman has shown no signs of being limited on the field. Practically every player in the league has something that hurts on their body but most can play affectively or they wouldn't be out there.

On the contrary. I'd say the fact that he's lost some his quickness is exactly a sign of being limited on the field. Also, again, "other players" are not any kind of proof.

You don't see anyone using injuries as an excuse for a players subpar play because teams don't play players who are too injured to be affective. Once they see an injury is affecting their play they sit them.

If a player is noticeably limping they can't play and I have yet to see Newman this season limping around prior to being beat.

A limp isn't necessary. I've seen people WITHOUT A PCL that didn't limp. It can surely affect their ability to play sports, though.

I'm not sure he'd limp with a rib injury either, though people do, depending on the nature and location of the pain. However, that can very much affect hip rotation, which is important for a DB.

You've already proven you're not credible you claimed you had me on ignore. Most here think Newman is in decline due to age not because he's been injured all year.

I'm desperately trying not to respond to your ad hom. When you rely on attacking the person and not the argument, it is just a sign of weakness.

He's had injuries in the past that have nagged him all season and he never got beat like he's been beaten this season.

You are an endless stream of logical fallacies. By the way, these aren't made up. You can look them all up yourself. That's why I'm listing them for you. They are real examples of unsound logic, meaning, you can't make a strong argument using them.

You bet I got you I have you all figured out. :toast: Like I said you put me on ignore to make everyone believe you couldn't read my posts so you would have an excuse to walk off because you know I'm not going to give you the last word.

You then immediately took me off ignore that's why you're back. It's made you look foolish you seem to get off on looking foolish. LOL

Oh, you're still on ignore. I'm sure any mod could confirm that. However, it doesn't block out when someone else quotes you. Also, there is a view post option, even when you have someone on ignore. I choose to use it now because I've decided to attempt to debate the actual topic with you, like you've been screaming all along. Of course, this will inevitably prove pointless, as I'm sure you will continue with your river of logical fallacies, all the while not even realizing you're doing it. Hopefully, you'll learn something.

The best part about ignore is that I can just choose to read your posts when I feel like it. I hit "view post" and it's like, BAM! Go-go gadget wall of nonsense!

Teams put players on their injury report for even the most minor ailments. I'm sure Dez was on the injury report plenty before he was lost this season.

He was questionable prior to at least one game. Tom Brady has been on alot of injury reports it's protocol.

Are you going to tell me that Newman hasn't lost any speed since he came into the league and is every bit the player he was 5 years ago?

Again, proof by example. Let's talk about Newman and forget how others have reacted, injured themselves, etc., eh?

Of course I think he's lost some speed. You're not putting words into my mouth are you? Of course not. You just asked a simple question. See how that works? I don't think he had the speed last year to shut down Jackson, only to lose so much of it due to less than a year of aging process, no.

 

[DanteEXT]

Classic ad hominem. Do you know what that is? It's a flaw in logic. That's a fact.

Ignore doesn't block out the quotes. I didn't read your quotes. I saw "PBJ" like a bright neon sign in one of your posts and it caught my attention. Simple question. Did you or did you not drop my name when replying to another poster?

The fact is, you're the only one who doesn't realize you're getting schooled here. Ironically enough, that is very delusional in and of itself.


No, your exact words were, "You claim he's injured but you haven't produced one article that says he's currently not healthy." Also, the VERY FIRST article was exactly about how he probably shouldn't have played because of injury. You can't be serious...

Refer to your quote. I comprehended just fine. I just didn't apply the "currently" as it was inappropriate for the discussion.

This is another classic logical fallacy called, "proof by example." This is an example of a flimsy argument. That is a fact. You can't apply the same thing across the board based on a few examples. But, don't take my word for it, look it up yourself.


How many times was that, exactly? I'm not necessarily arguing this point, but if you are going to assert something like "all the times he got beat weeks before and after that", you better have some ammo to back it up. I'm talking some stats with a reference point. Otherwise, this is also a lazy attempt at a point.

This is easy. ANY ankle injury can take at least 4-6 weeks for full recovery. I don't have to be his personal PT to know that, as some things are relatively constant. There's a reason 95% of my ACL, TKA, THA, etc. patients follow the EXACT same respective exercise protocols. It's because typical musculoskeletal injuries follow typical patterns. I don't expect you to understand this. Everybody brings something to the table. Knowledge in this area is what I bring.

When he shut down Jackson all of last year, then I question how you could honestly think a year of aging process is the determining factor.


Less than a year of the aging process separates a Pro Bowl player from the scrap heap? Issues at safety are a huge, and I've never disputed that, but injury is obviously the more likely culprit.

Again, proof by example. It's flawed logic. There's no way around it. You can't say because you see one or a few red apples, that it proves ALL apples are red. Get it, yet?

Wrong. It only confirms that he played fine. Also, more time has elapsed since injury. Coincidence? It sounds as if you're trying to imply that because he played fine this week, he must have been healthy all season. Say it isn't so.




If you read the first article (I know how you love articles), it states that Phillips feels as if he made a mistake letting Newman play. A minor injury can still have major consequences.

Also teams let injured players play ALL THE TIME, even if it hampers play. If they feel the injured player is better than any other option, then they play them. Who do you feel should have taken Newman's spot and why aren't you on the coaching staff?


You know this from fact, or is another one of your lame arguments? Do you have any knowledge or insight as to what goes on, especially on a team that is shallow in the CB position?

Again, please quit bringing up other players as proof by example. How many errors in logic is that now? 4?


FYI, it was posed as a question. However, you did say this:

"The fact that he hasn't missed a start all season and has been playing is proof he's not injured."

You claim that by Newman not missing a start, that is PROOF that he is not injured. Your words. I was simply asking if you can apply logic across the board or does that just apply to Newman, because I wanted to know.

Nope, quoted you and asked a question.

Really? I'd really like to know your expert opinion on this. Let's see what you really know about injuries. Because I can assure you, I know what I'm talking about.

On the contrary. I'd say the fact that he's lost some his quickness is exactly a sign of being limited on the field. Also, again, "other players" are not any kind of proof.

A limp isn't necessary. I've seen people WITHOUT A PCL that didn't limp. It can surely affect their ability to play sports, though.

I'm not sure he'd limp with a rib injury either, though people do, depending on the nature and location of the pain. However, that can very much affect hip rotation, which is important for a DB.




I'm desperately trying not to respond to your ad hom. When you rely on attacking the person and not the argument, it is just a sign of weakness.

You are an endless stream of logical fallacies. By the way, these aren't made up. You can look them all up yourself. That's why I'm listing them for you. They are real examples of unsound logic, meaning, you can't make a strong argument using them.
Oh, you're still on ignore. I'm sure any mod could confirm that. However, it doesn't block out when someone else quotes you. Also, there is a view post option, even when you have someone on ignore. I choose to use it now because I've decided to attempt to debate the actual topic with you, like you've been screaming all along. Of course, this will inevitably prove pointless, as I'm sure you will continue with your river of logical fallacies, all the while not even realizing you're doing it. Hopefully, you'll learn something.

The best part about ignore is that I can just choose to read your posts when I feel like it. I hit "view post" and it's like, BAM! Go-go gadget wall of nonsense!



Again, proof by example. Let's talk about Newman and forget how others have reacted, injured themselves, etc., eh?

Of course I think he's lost some speed. You're not putting words into my mouth are you? Of course not. You just asked a simple question. See how that works? I don't think he had the speed last year to shut down Jackson, only to lose so much of it due to less than a year of aging process, no.

Got some and some :beer1:, this thread is still entertaining

 

[RoyTheHammer]

300 replies. Congratulations. :laugh2:


My take again: He's a solid CB, had a poor year, not a great CB though. Shadows his man well when playing man coverage, does need safety help a majority of the time though, doesn't make enough plays on the ball, and gives up alot of throws underneath. Inconsistent is the best word for him sometimes. NOT a shutdown CB.

Does anyone have access to in depth statistics from any website where they could find things like completion percentage against, how many times CB's are targeted, etc.. I know there are very few sites online that probably track these statistics, and i can't seem to find them. It would be a big help in this debate though. I'd have to assume the past couple years Newman's completion percentage against is high, especially this year.

 

[PBJTime]

300 replies. Congratulations. :laugh2:


My take again: He's a solid CB, had a poor year, not a great CB though. Shadows his man well when playing man coverage, does need safety help a majority of the time though, doesn't make enough plays on the ball, and gives up alot of throws underneath. Inconsistent is the best word for him sometimes. NOT a shutdown CB.

Does anyone have access to in depth statistics from any website where they could find things like completion percentage against, how many times CB's are targeted, etc.. I know there are very few sites online that probably track these statistics, and i can't seem to find them. It would be a big help in this debate though. I'd have to assume the past couple years Newman's completion percentage against is high, especially this year.

I basically agree with your assessment, though I feel he has been constantly affected by injuries. Like I've said before though, the end result is all that really matters.

Most in depth stat sites require payment. I'm simply not THAT interested in proving a point. I did, however, find a DMN article that states Newman allowed a very respectable 77.3 passer rating against him last year. According to the article, through 12 games this year, the rating against him is 94.1--still better than Jenkins at 105.7.

 

[Idgit]

300 replies. Congratulations. :laugh2:


My take again: He's a solid CB, had a poor year, not a great CB though. Shadows his man well when playing man coverage, does need safety help a majority of the time though, doesn't make enough plays on the ball, and gives up alot of throws underneath. Inconsistent is the best word for him sometimes. NOT a shutdown CB.

Does anyone have access to in depth statistics from any website where they could find things like completion percentage against, how many times CB's are targeted, etc.. I know there are very few sites online that probably track these statistics, and i can't seem to find them. It would be a big help in this debate though. I'd have to assume the past couple years Newman's completion percentage against is high, especially this year.

CB stats are notoriously difficult to come by, though I don't doubt there's data out there that would be relevant to the thread topic.

Nobody's really evaluating Newman anymore, though. Now were harassing KJJ for amusement.

 

[Idgit]

Yeah I do tell them a lot of the same things because birds of a feather flock together. As for "a lot" I'm only posting with 2 others you call that "a lot?"

Looks like you could use help with another definition. :laugh2:

Ah...birds of a feather flock together. *That's* why multiple posters give you the same criticisms in the same thread non-stop. I knew there must be a reason!

Your coping mechanisms are truly impressive.

 

[PBJTime]

Ah...birds of a feather flock together. *That's* why multiple posters give you the same criticisms in the same thread non-stop. I knew there must be a reason!

Your coping mechanisms are truly impressive.

It really is quite funny. He's getting worked by like three different posters. I'll give him some credit though, he's still holding on for dear life, despite the drubbing. I'm surprised he hasn't worn himself out yet because he compulsively responds to every post from every person. I don't think he can help himself! LOL!

 

[superpunk]

I win this thread. You might as well lock it up.

 

[KJJ]

Classic ad hominem. Do you know what that is? It's a flaw in logic. That's a fact.

You would know all about it I'm sure you've heard that many times. Have you ever wondered what life would have been like had you received enough oxygen at birth?

Ignore doesn't block out the quotes. I didn't read your quotes. I saw "PBJ" like a bright neon sign in one of your posts and it caught my attention. Simple question. Did you or did you not drop my name when replying to another poster?

You don't have me on ignore you're full of BS! If you were "ignoring" me it wouldn't matter if I dropped your name you would ignore it. I have complete control over you I even have you copying my posting style. LOL

The fact is, you're the only one who doesn't realize you're getting schooled here.

The fact is you don't realize you're delusional...NEXT!

No, your exact words were, "You claim he's injured but you haven't produced one article that says he's currently not healthy." Also, the VERY FIRST article was exactly about how he probably shouldn't have played because of injury. You can't be serious...

The very first article was on Nov 2 that injury doesn't excuse him getting beat Dec 12 against Philly. Are you saying everytime he's been beaten this season it's been because of injury?

How many times was that, exactly? I'm not necessarily arguing this point, but if you are going to assert something like "all the times he got beat weeks before and after that", you better have some ammo to back it up. I'm talking some stats with a reference point. Otherwise, this is also a lazy attempt at a point.

It doesn't matter exactly how many times it's been repeatedly. It's been too many times that's why these threads keep popping up. You think these threads keep appearing because he's playing well?...NEXT!

When he shut down Jackson all of last year, then I question how you could honestly think a year of aging process is the determining factor.

The Cowboys were a much better team last year they owned Philly. An aging players play can drop off big time in one year. I've given you plenty of examples of it and am not about to repeat myself.

Less than a year of the aging process separates a Pro Bowl player from the scrap heap? Issues at safety are a huge, and I've never disputed that, but injury is obviously the more likely culprit.

Newman wasn't a legitimate pro bowl player last season he was a replacement for a replacement. Get real...NEXT!

Again, proof by example. It's flawed logic.

The only one who's logic is flawed is yours...NEXT!

Wrong. It only confirms that he played fine. Also, more time has elapsed since injury. Coincidence? It sounds as if you're trying to imply that because he played fine this week, he must have been healthy all season. Say it isn't so.

He played fine last week because he wasn't tested. The Cardinals are a crap team with a rookie QB....NEXT!

If you read the first article (I know how you love articles), it states that Phillips feels as if he made a mistake letting Newman play. A minor injury can still have major consequences.

He said he made a mistake that one week that doesn't excuse Newman for getting beat prior to the injury or weeks after the injury...NEXT!

Also teams let injured players play ALL THE TIME, even if it hampers play. If they feel the injured player is better than any other option, then they play them.

Teams don't let injured players play with every injury. There's some injuries where they make them sit and get healthy. Barber had a calf injury and the Cowboys sat him for 2 weeks. RW missed a game there's hundreds of examples where players don't play with certain injuries...NEXT!

Who do you feel should have taken Newman's spot and why aren't you on the coaching staff?

Scandrick could have taken his place if he was too injured he has 3 years of experience and looks faster than Newman. As for why I'm not on the coaching staff I have a much better gig...NEXT!

You know this from fact, or is another one of your lame arguments? Do you have any knowledge or insight as to what goes on, especially on a team that is shallow in the CB position?

Common sense which is something you obviously don't have will tell you that a team won't play a player that's too injured to be affective. If a player is too injured to play teams have what are called "backups" who take their place.

Can't believe I had to school you on that. :laugh2: Scandrick is a third year player who's shown some improvement this season and could fill in.

Again, please quit bringing up other players as proof by example. How many errors in logic is that now? 4?

Even coaches bring other players up as examples. Examples are exactly that "examples."....NEXT!

FYI, it was posed as a question. However, you did say this:

"The fact that he hasn't missed a start all season and has been playing is proof he's not injured."

Exactly, he played and didn't look limited so in my book he wasn't injured...NEXT!

You claim that by Newman not missing a start, that is PROOF that he is not injured. Your words. I was simply asking if you can apply logic across the board or does that just apply to Newman, because I wanted to know.

It applies to alot of players. Players play with injuries all the time but teams won't play a player if they can't be affective with an injury or there's a chance it could linger by not allowing the injury to completely heal. Newman's subpar play this season is because he's in decline.

Really? I'd really like to know your expert opinion on this. Let's see what you really know about injuries. Because I can assure you, I know what I'm talking about.

You don't know anything in regards to Newman because you haven't examined him...NEXT!

On the contrary. I'd say the fact that he's lost some his quickness is exactly a sign of being limited on the field. Also, again, "other players" are not any kind of proof.

He was showing signs of losing quickness 2 years ago his loss of speed and quickness didn't happen over night.

A limp isn't necessary. I've seen people WITHOUT A PCL that didn't limp. It can surely affect their ability to play sports, though.

Like I said you haven't examined Newman so save your breath...NEXT!

I'm not sure he'd limp with a rib injury either, though people do, depending on the nature and location of the pain. However, that can very much affect hip rotation, which is important for a DB.

You're not sure about anything all you're doing is making excuses and speculating...NEXT!

I'm desperately trying not to respond to your ad hom. When you rely on attacking the person and not the argument, it is just a sign of weakness.

If you can't stop responding to me then you have some serious issues. You're the one who's been waging an attack and you're right it is a sign of weakness.

You're incredibly weak you can't even ignore me even though you've tried that's WEAK!

Oh, you're still on ignore. I'm sure any mod could confirm that.

You claim you have me on ignore but you're still responding to me. You obviously don't know what ignore means. :laugh2:

The best part about ignore is that I can just choose to read your posts when I feel like it. I hit "view post" and it's like, BAM! Go-go gadget wall of nonsense!

You're still trying to convince me you have me on ignore. You are a complete joke!

Let's talk about Newman and forget how others have reacted, injured themselves, etc., eh?

Why don't you go to a therapist and talk about Newman. LOL

Of course I think he's lost some speed. You're not putting words into my mouth are you?

I've been swaying you from the very beginning. Like I said earlier I have complete control over you that's why you can't ignore me.

 

[KJJ]

Ah...birds of a feather flock together. *That's* why multiple posters give you the same criticisms in the same thread non-stop. I knew there must be a reason!

Your coping mechanisms are truly impressive.

You are one of 3 stooges following me around who are living alone on an a deserted island. Everyone is just sitting back laughing watching me shoot you three full of holes. :shoot3:

 

[superpunk]

KJJ is raping face in this thread. The Stooges...priceless! lmao.

 

[KJJ]

It really is quite funny. He's getting worked by like three different posters. I'll give him some credit though, he's still holding on for dear life, despite the drubbing. I'm surprised he hasn't worn himself out yet because he compulsively responds to every post from every person. I don't think he can help himself! LOL!

What's funny is you're responding to a fan who thinks Newman has played well this season despite being repeatedly beaten. What do you think of Igit's opinion? :laugh2:

Just more proof you'll form an alliance with anyone who opposes me regardless that your views differ from theirs.

 

[superpunk]

Just more proof you'll form an alliance with anyone who opposes me regardless that your views differ from theirs.

This should make for an OUTRAGEOUS tribal council.

 

[Goldenrichards83]

300 replies. Congratulations. :laugh2:


My take again: He's a solid CB, had a poor year, not a great CB though. Shadows his man well when playing man coverage, does need safety help a majority of the time though, doesn't make enough plays on the ball, and gives up alot of throws underneath. Inconsistent is the best word for him sometimes. NOT a shutdown CB.

Does anyone have access to in depth statistics from any website where they could find things like completion percentage against, how many times CB's are targeted, etc.. I know there are very few sites online that probably track these statistics, and i can't seem to find them. It would be a big help in this debate though. I'd have to assume the past couple years Newman's completion percentage against is high, especially this year.

Comments | Recommended http://www.***BANNED-URL***/images/cgm/check_icon.gif

Numbers offer proof that Mike Jenkins, Terence Newman have regressed


[URL="http://dmn.beloblog.com/mt-static/support/uploads/sabin%2C-rainer.jpg"][/URL] Posted at 11:55 PM on Tue., Dec. 14, 2010 | Permalink | Yahoo! Buzz
Rainer Sabin / Reporter [URL="http://www.***BANNED-URL***/blogs/images/bio-icon.jpg"]http://www.***BANNED-URL***/blogs/images/bio-icon.jpg Bio[/URL] | [URL="http://www.***BANNED-URL***/blogs/images/email-icon.jpg"]http://www.***BANNED-URL***/blogs/images/email-icon.jpg[/URL] E-mail | http://www.***BANNED-URL***/blogs/images/email-icon.jpg News tips

That has been the reality for much of the year. Based on data alone, the coverage provided by Jenkins and Newman has been far from impervious. They are among a select group of eight defenders who have yielded the most receptions in the NFL this season.

Before Sunday, quarterbacks have completed 49 of 75 pass attempts against Jenkins, attaining a 105.7 passer rating in the process. Newman hasn't been much better. He has been picked on 73 times, allowing 47 receptions as quarterbacks have achieved a 94.1 passer rating.

The evidence collected this season wouldn't be so alarming if the results had been anticipated. But they weren't. Jenkins was selected to the Pro Bowl last year after having a season during which quarterbacks who threw in his direction produced a 53.6 passer rating.

<snip>

Mike Jenkins
Stat category; 2009; 2010 (Through 12 games)
Receptions yielded; 51; 49
Times targeted; 107; 75
Receiving yards yielded; 643; 745
Touchdowns yielded; 2; 3
Interceptions; 5; 1
Quarterback rating against; 53.6; 105.7

Terence Newman
Stat Category; 2009; 2010 (Through 12 games)
Receptions yielded; 48; 47
Times targeted; 93; 73
Receiving yards yielded; 698; 632
Touchdowns yielded; 4; 3
Interceptions; 3; 2
Quarterback rating against; 77.3; 94.1
http://cowboysblog.***BANNED-URL***/archives/2010/12/numbers-offer-proof-that-mike.html

 

[JPM]

This should make for an OUTRAGEOUS tribal council.

You are on a roll today SP, are you trying to wrap the funniest poster award again ???

 

[superpunk]

You are on a roll today SP, are you trying to wrap the funniest poster award again ???

Not sure what you're talking about I just really dig the hot fire that KJJ is spitting on the haterz.

 

[RoyTheHammer]

Comments | Recommended [URL="http://www.***BANNED-URL***/images/cgm/check_icon.gif"][URL="http://www.***BANNED-URL***/images/cgm/check_icon.gif"]http://www.***BANNED-URL***/images/cgm/check_icon.gif[/URL][/URL]

Numbers offer proof that Mike Jenkins, Terence Newman have regressed


[URL="http://dmn.beloblog.com/mt-static/support/uploads/sabin%2C-rainer.jpg"][URL="http://dmn.beloblog.com/mt-static/support/uploads/sabin%2C-rainer.jpg"][URL="http://dmn.beloblog.com/mt-static/support/uploads/sabin%2C-rainer.jpg"][/URL][/URL][/URL] Posted at 11:55 PM on Tue., Dec. 14, 2010 | Permalink | Yahoo! Buzz
Rainer Sabin / Reporter [URL="http://www.***BANNED-URL***/blogs/images/bio-icon.jpg"][URL="http://www.***BANNED-URL***/blogs/images/bio-icon.jpg"][URL="http://www.***BANNED-URL***/blogs/images/bio-icon.jpg"]http://www.***BANNED-URL***/blogs/images/bio-icon.jpg[/URL][/URL] Bio[/URL] | [URL="http://www.***BANNED-URL***/blogs/images/email-icon.jpg"][URL="http://www.***BANNED-URL***/blogs/images/email-icon.jpg"][URL="http://www.***BANNED-URL***/blogs/images/email-icon.jpg"]http://www.***BANNED-URL***/blogs/images/email-icon.jpg[/URL][/URL][/URL] E-mail | [URL="http://www.***BANNED-URL***/blogs/images/email-icon.jpg"][URL="http://www.***BANNED-URL***/blogs/images/email-icon.jpg"]http://www.***BANNED-URL***/blogs/images/email-icon.jpg[/URL][/URL] News tips

That has been the reality for much of the year. Based on data alone, the coverage provided by Jenkins and Newman has been far from impervious. They are among a select group of eight defenders who have yielded the most receptions in the NFL this season.

Before Sunday, quarterbacks have completed 49 of 75 pass attempts against Jenkins, attaining a 105.7 passer rating in the process. Newman hasn't been much better. He has been picked on 73 times, allowing 47 receptions as quarterbacks have achieved a 94.1 passer rating.

The evidence collected this season wouldn't be so alarming if the results had been anticipated. But they weren't. Jenkins was selected to the Pro Bowl last year after having a season during which quarterbacks who threw in his direction produced a 53.6 passer rating.

<snip>

Mike Jenkins
Stat category; 2009; 2010 (Through 12 games)
Receptions yielded; 51; 49
Times targeted; 107; 75
Receiving yards yielded; 643; 745
Touchdowns yielded; 2; 3
Interceptions; 5; 1
Quarterback rating against; 53.6; 105.7

Terence Newman
Stat Category; 2009; 2010 (Through 12 games)
Receptions yielded; 48; 47
Times targeted; 93; 73
Receiving yards yielded; 698; 632
Touchdowns yielded; 4; 3
Interceptions; 3; 2
Quarterback rating against; 77.3; 94.1
http://cowboysblog.***BANNED-URL***/archives/2010/12/numbers-offer-proof-that-mike.html

Ouch.. that's about what i thought. So with some basic estimation, Newman's completion percentage against was a little over 50 % last year. This year its between 60-70%. That's crazy, that doesn't even take into account how many over/under throws and dropped balls there were either.

 

[KJJ]

This should make for an OUTRAGEOUS tribal council.

This thread has turned into CowboysZone's version of survivor.

 

[superpunk]

This thread has turned into CowboysZone's version of survivor.

Thanks for spelling out the joke, Buzz Killington.

 

[KJJ]

Thanks for spelling out the joke, Buzz Killington.

I've had a lot of practice having to spell things out in this thread.