randoff Posted June 29, 2007 Share Posted June 29, 2007 ....You know what I mean, stop tryin to outwit someone on the INTERNET. What kind of loser are you? Youre putting up posts, while talking in the 3rd person, that appear to try and sound witty. Just talk about the subject at hand, dont try to win some poster of the year award. LMAO...at 'Poster of the year award'. Oh man!!! Funny! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nesta Posted June 29, 2007 Share Posted June 29, 2007 My point is I think you're putting way too much of the blame on the receivers and not enough on the passer. I can't find how many they dropped individually, but according to that list its not more than 6. That's one every 3-4 games. When Eli's passing 30 odd times a game that's not effecting his passer rating too much. At some stage you have to look to his accuracy. Too many of his balls are rushed or just plain not catchable. Owens, on the other had, had a fucking shocking year. This makes me happy. Cumulatively, we had a lot of dropped passes. 26. Above the nfl average I believe. However, he also had a lot more poor throws. Above nfl avg. It all came down to toomer last year. Before he was injured he caught 62% of everything thrown at him and zero drops. I think plax caught around 55% of balls thrown at him. Big drop off considering Plax was our number one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BIGBLUE01 Posted June 29, 2007 Share Posted June 29, 2007 Cumulatively, we had a lot of dropped passes. 26. Above the nfl average I believe. However, he also had a lot more poor throws. Above nfl avg. It all came down to toomer last year. Before he was injured he caught 62% of everything thrown at him and zero drops. I think plax caught around 55% of balls thrown at him. Big drop off considering Plax was our number one. This is exactly what Ive been tryin to say on this topic. Im not saying Eli has been perfect, but we had alot of dropped passes that would have made Eli's #'s better. You cant really fault a QB for throwin it right at the chest, and the receiver droppin it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BadEgg Posted June 29, 2007 Share Posted June 29, 2007 Show me ONCE, where I contradicted myself. And no, the words are not challenging. You know what I mean, stop tryin to outwit someone on the INTERNET. What kind of loser are you? Youre putting up posts, while talking in the 3rd person, that appear to try and sound witty. Just talk about the subject at hand, dont try to win some poster of the year award. BigBlue, as of this very moment, you have 15 posts today and account for 7.25% of today's total posts on this board. :yikes: You are the second most active poster behind Prince Nas. Who is trying to win poster of the year? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BIGBLUE01 Posted June 29, 2007 Share Posted June 29, 2007 BigBlue, as of this very moment, you have 15 posts today and account for 7.25% of today's total posts on this board. :yikes: You are the second most active poster behind Prince Nas. Who is trying to win poster of the year? I didnt say "Most posts", I said quit talking in the 3rd person and trying to sound like your outwitting someone. You are really bad at comebacks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ksm7 Posted June 29, 2007 Author Share Posted June 29, 2007 Show me ONCE, where I contradicted myself. And no, the words are not challenging. You know what I mean, stop tryin to outwit someone on the INTERNET. What kind of loser are you? Youre putting up posts, while talking in the 3rd person, that appear to try and sound witty. Just talk about the subject at hand, dont try to win some poster of the year award. Again? The Dog will point out two such occassions: 1. When you first stated that you observed burress/shockey dropping a lot of passes that were "right on the numbers," followed by your agreement with a second post that you "were begining to agree" that they only dropped passes "when it counted", except that you couldn't agree that they were "unclutch." 2. The Bills were a weak team when they went to the Super Bowl (there as a product of a weak conference), but that they were a deserving team the year they played the Giants... The Dog doesn't try to appear witty, just continues to report on fact and provide opinion based on observation...as for speaking to the subject at hand, the Dog has repeatedly requested clarification on the above contradictions (the subject at hand in this case), and you have chosen to respond otherwise...and being new to the boards, the Dog requests more information on this poster of the year award - how does one get nominated? What is the criteria? This sounds intriguing... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ksm7 Posted June 29, 2007 Author Share Posted June 29, 2007 This is exactly what Ive been tryin to say on this topic. Im not saying Eli has been perfect, but we had alot of dropped passes that would have made Eli's #'s better. You cant really fault a QB for throwin it right at the chest, and the receiver droppin it. You see, you are missing the Dog's point on this whole subject...dropped passes is a weak statistic to support a QB's productivity, because every QB is effected, not just Manning. Drops are part of the game. It is the equivalent of saying that the Giant's defense would have a better rating had they just not let up as many touchdowns...no kidding...it is, dare the Dog say, silly... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BIGBLUE01 Posted June 29, 2007 Share Posted June 29, 2007 Again? The Dog will point out two such occassions: 1. When you first stated that you observed burress/shockey dropping a lot of passes that were "right on the numbers," followed by your agreement with a second post that you "were begining to agree" that they only dropped passes "when it counted", except that you couldn't agree that they were "unclutch." 2. The Bills were a weak team when they went to the Super Bowl (there as a product of a weak conference), but that they were a deserving team the year they played the Giants... The Dog doesn't try to appear witty, just continues to report on fact and provide opinion based on observation...as for speaking to the subject at hand, the Dog has repeatedly requested clarification on the above contradictions (the subject at hand in this case), and you have chosen to respond otherwise...and being new to the boards, the Dog requests more information on this poster of the year award - how does one get nominated? What is the criteria? This sounds intriguing... Still waiting. 1. Youre rebuttal doesnt even make sense. Who cares if it was when they counted or not, a dropped pass in the chest is a dropped pass in the chest. 2. Bills were the best team in the weak AFC. Thats all Ive ever said. They were better when they played the Giants because they hadnt just suffered 2 previous betaings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ksm7 Posted June 29, 2007 Author Share Posted June 29, 2007 Still waiting. 1. Youre rebuttal doesnt even make sense. Who cares if it was when they counted or not, a dropped pass in the chest is a dropped pass in the chest. 2. Bills were the best team in the weak AFC. Thats all Ive ever said. They were better when they played the Giants because they hadnt just suffered 2 previous betaings. Not surprising that you didn't grasp this...for the last time: if you say in one statement that those two receivers drop passes, and then later say that they don't actually drop a lot of passes, but do so when it counts, and then add to that the opinion that they are not "unclutch" then you have contradicted yourself three times - first they drop passes, then they really don't, except when it counts, except not really since they are in fact clutch receivers... the Bills can't be the beneficiary of a weak conference through those runs unless it was the year when they played the Giants, in which case that year they were deserving...The Dog is sure you like to fit things into whatever will work for your points at the time...and now the Dog will no longer entertain this issue, as it is quite silly... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BIGBLUE01 Posted June 29, 2007 Share Posted June 29, 2007 You see, you are missing the Dog's point on this whole subject...dropped passes is a weak statistic to support a QB's productivity, because every QB is effected, not just Manning. Drops are part of the game. It is the equivalent of saying that the Giant's defense would have a better rating had they just not let up as many touchdowns...no kidding...it is, dare the Dog say, silly... You are getting ridiculous. I know it affects every QB, never said it didnt. How can you not understand the simplicity of my statements. And the D analogy, you are getting way out of control. Eli threw a whole lot of passes. Some were caught, some were dropped, and some were thrown crappy or intercepted. If the dropped ones were caught, he would have a better comp. ratio. And yes, that goes for every QB, but were talkin about Eli now. How can you not understand, Im simply stating the obvious. Theres no need to try and analyze anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BIGBLUE01 Posted June 29, 2007 Share Posted June 29, 2007 Not surprising that you didn't grasp this...for the last time: if you say in one statement that those two receivers drop passes, and then later say that they don't actually drop a lot of passes, but do so when it counts, and then add to that the opinion that they are not "unclutch" then you have contradicted yourself three times - first they drop passes, then they really don't, except when it counts, except not really since they are in fact clutch receivers... the Bills can't be the beneficiary of a weak conference through those runs unless it was the year when they played the Giants, in which case that year they were deserving...The Dog is sure you like to fit things into whatever will work for your points at the time...and now the Dog will no longer entertain this issue, as it is quite silly... Youre like a little kid, as long as I reply, you'll say something else. LOL...see ya Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nesta Posted June 30, 2007 Share Posted June 30, 2007 The Nesta's favorite memory of the dog: When the dog permanently left the GMB. Crawl back under that rock. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BIGBLUE01 Posted June 30, 2007 Share Posted June 30, 2007 The Nesta's favorite memory of the dog: When the dog permanently left the GMB. Crawl back under that rock. I feel instantly dumber for engaging in these convo's with him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ksm7 Posted June 30, 2007 Author Share Posted June 30, 2007 I feel instantly dumber for engaging in these convo's with him. Hmmm...it appears that you are the one who can't quite disengage...The Dog suugests rereading this thread...and the several others where you have been involved in various discussions with others who have all had challenging times explaining the basics to you...The Dog weeps for the education system and all of those it has failed...that being said, the Dog is not one to take a back seat to anything...from this point forward, the Italian Hotdog will campaign to improve the education systems everywhere, so that intellectual debates can be had on message boards around the country... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BIGBLUE01 Posted June 30, 2007 Share Posted June 30, 2007 Hmmm...it appears that you are the one who can't quite disengage...The Dog suugests rereading this thread...and the several others where you have been involved in various discussions with others who have all had challenging times explaining the basics to you...The Dog weeps for the education system and all of those it has failed...that being said, the Dog is not one to take a back seat to anything...from this point forward, the Italian Hotdog will campaign to improve the education systems everywhere, so that intellectual debates can be had on message boards around the country... Bravo, thanks for the contribution. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rphguy Posted July 2, 2007 Share Posted July 2, 2007 Dog, the answer to your question depends on perspective: From the perspective of the Giants front office: After getting raped on draft day by the CHargers, there is no time table for the QB, whatever his name may be, to prove his value. it's not technically rape if you are a willing participant in the sexual act. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ksm7 Posted July 2, 2007 Author Share Posted July 2, 2007 it's not technically rape if you are a willing participant in the sexual act. Interesting point. The Giants were certainly a willing participant in the act, but the Dog wonders if it was one of those deals when they woke up the next morning, and fully realized what they had done, if they would cry rape after the fact...either way, the bed is made, and so the timeline keeps ticking... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JayD Posted July 2, 2007 Share Posted July 2, 2007 Interesting point. The Giants were certainly a willing participant in the act, but the Dog wonders if it was one of those deals when they woke up the next morning, and fully realized what they had done, if they would cry rape after the fact...either way, the bed is made, and so the timeline keeps ticking... The Bolts havent won anything, nor are they going to, we wont know who made out better for a few years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ksm7 Posted July 2, 2007 Author Share Posted July 2, 2007 The Bolts havent won anything, nor are they going to, we wont know who made out better for a few years. The Dog has maintained that regardless of what either team does, the trade was poor for a number of reasons. The Chargers success is irrelevant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BIGBLUE01 Posted July 3, 2007 Share Posted July 3, 2007 The Dog has maintained that regardless of what either team does, the trade was poor for a number of reasons. The Chargers success is irrelevant. ???? Now you have just went plain...SILLY. Then how, my wise self righteous friend, do you guage the trade?? How is it poor if it doesnt matter what the teams do? WAIT! Put down the pipe before answering. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nesta Posted July 3, 2007 Share Posted July 3, 2007 ???? Now you have just went plain...SILLY. Then how, my wise self righteous friend, do you guage the trade?? How is it poor if it doesnt matter what the teams do? WAIT! Put down the pipe before answering. He's a Manning hater. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gateb Posted July 3, 2007 Share Posted July 3, 2007 Back to the topic of dropped passes a couple of pages back... theres just one play that for some reason has been stuck in my mind all off-season. It was against Jacksonville. Eli probably threw one of the best passes I'd ever seen out of any QB I've watched, right in stride in Plax's hands. But randomly, maybe he lost it in the lights idk, Plax tries to tip it to himself. He was behind the secondary and it would've been a TD. We would've been up 17-13 if he caught it I think. Instead, he made what appeared to be a circus catch and the play was overturned. It never should have gone to tipping, it was right in his hands. It seems that whenever Eli makes that great long pass, either Carter was floundering for it or Plax was trying to make a show offy play. Sometimes it's great, but others its useless. Here's to hoping a guy who has the capability to get by the secondary, ala Steve Smith, can haul in those passes and go all the way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ksm7 Posted July 3, 2007 Author Share Posted July 3, 2007 ???? Now you have just went plain...SILLY. Then how, my wise self righteous friend, do you guage the trade?? How is it poor if it doesnt matter what the teams do? WAIT! Put down the pipe before answering. If either team wins a super bowl, it won't be because the QB did it on his own - teams that win the Super Bowl have done so because of other factors...in fact, the Dog would be so bold as to say you do not need a franchise QB to win a Super Bowl, and in many cases in recent history, this is the case...The trade was a poor decision because the Giants had a number of weaknesses to address, and giving up opportunities to build up those weaknesses for an unproven player when two other QB's that were highly touted would be available for less was not the best move to make...If the Chargers win the Super Bowl with Rivers, it won't be because he is a great QB that single handedly won it, it will be because they built a great team around him...likewise with the Giants should they ever win with Manning - the difference being the trade put the Chargers on that track immediately, since they were able to parlay that into the addition of key players that went beyond a QB with potential... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
randoff Posted July 3, 2007 Share Posted July 3, 2007 If either team wins a super bowl, it won't be because the QB did it on his own - teams that win the Super Bowl have done so because of other factors...in fact, the Dog would be so bold as to say you do not need a franchise QB to win a Super Bowl, and in many cases in recent history, this is the case...The trade was a poor decision because the Giants had a number of weaknesses to address, and giving up opportunities to build up those weaknesses for an unproven player when two other QB's that were highly touted would be available for less was not the best move to make...If the Chargers win the Super Bowl with Rivers, it won't be because he is a great QB that single handedly won it, it will be because they built a great team around him...likewise with the Giants should they ever win with Manning - the difference being the trade put the Chargers on that track immediately, since they were able to parlay that into the addition of key players that went beyond a QB with potential... Ok? So the question is: "How many years do you give a QB?" Is it safe to say that the DOG doesn't think that Manning isn't a 'franchise QB'? And also is it safe to say that the DOG thinks that with Rivers and the 2 players that the Chargers got via Eli trade will help them Chargers win multiple Superbowls, in years to come? If (for example) the Chargers don't win a Superbowl with Rivers, Merriman and the other choice player in that trade....how long would you give a Rivers to do it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BIGBLUE01 Posted July 3, 2007 Share Posted July 3, 2007 If either team wins a super bowl, it won't be because the QB did it on his own - teams that win the Super Bowl have done so because of other factors...in fact, the Dog would be so bold as to say you do not need a franchise QB to win a Super Bowl, and in many cases in recent history, this is the case...The trade was a poor decision because the Giants had a number of weaknesses to address, and giving up opportunities to build up those weaknesses for an unproven player when two other QB's that were highly touted would be available for less was not the best move to make...If the Chargers win the Super Bowl with Rivers, it won't be because he is a great QB that single handedly won it, it will be because they built a great team around him...likewise with the Giants should they ever win with Manning - the difference being the trade put the Chargers on that track immediately, since they were able to parlay that into the addition of key players that went beyond a QB with potential... True, and I stated this on another thread, that its unfair to say that Rivers is doing better because he had a healthier, better supporting cast around him. But he's still a factor, little or big, he's still a factor. So is Merriman, I mean they play, they affect the outcome of the game. I still dont see what you think this trade will be judged by. If its not the players involved, then how will it be judged? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now