Nfl Network Special Top 10 LB corps.

[xxi-xxv]

So the elite teams of the 80's and early 90's had an answer for LT. At least enough of an answer that would allow them to face the Giants twice a season and continue on with their business of winning Superbowls. They were able to accomplish this despite the fact that LT (to quote another poster) instilled "fear" in them and "killed" teams...They were able to be so successful despite the fact that LT (to quote another poster) was the greatest football player at any position and "killed" teams...

 

As far as finishing first in other divisions goes, I don't recall who finished first in these other divisions. Most people probably don't. Because nobody cares...But I'm sure that LT scared them and "killed" them as well...

 

Lt's teams beat the Niners in the playoffs in 85, 86 and 90. Twice at home. In the home contests the best offense of that era failed to score a TD, falling 17-3 in 85 and 49-3 in 86. In 1990 at San Fran the LT Giants ended the 3 peat dreams of the 49ers 15-13.

 

Lt's teams also lost to the Niners in the playoffs 3 times(coincidentally with three different coaches) they lost 38-24 in 1981(year San Fran won SB) they lost 38-24. In 1984 they lost 21-10(another year San Fran won SB) and of course in Lt's last game the Niners beat them 44-3 in San Fran.

 

I think if anything the telling stat here is that the Parcells coached, Belichick coordinated LT Giants were 3-1 vs the Niners of the 80's. Not bad when you consider that was one of the all time great teams in football, In fact I would bet that no team was at orabove .500 vs the Niners in the playoffs in that 81-94 time span.

 

As far as the SKins go, we can get a little more in depth here as they played twice a year every year in Lt's career.

81 1-1

82 0-2

83 0-2

84 1-1

85 1-1

86 2-0 and 1-0 in the only playoff game the 2 teams played in the LT era.

87 0-1(I refuse as should anyone to count the game played with scabs in week 4 of the 87 season)

88 2-0

89 2-0

90 2-0

91 0-2

92 1-1

93 2-0

 

So in Lt's 13seasons his teams were 14-11 vs the SKins in the rgular season and 1-0 vs them in the playoffs. Because I think that a lot of all these teams success(Niners and SKins) is due to the fact that they had great coaching we can also look at the Giants record vs the SKins with Parcells and Belichick coaching LT and that is 10-5 and 1-0 in the playoffs.

 

I think its clear to see that the Giants and LT had their fair share of success vs the elite NFC teams of the 80's and early 90's. What the Giants were guilty of is probably not capitalizing in 88 or 89 and winning another SB and that strike of 87 killed them.

[BIGBLUE01]

Lt's teams beat the Niners in the playoffs in 85, 86 and 90. Twice at home. In the home contests the best offense of that era failed to score a TD, falling 17-3 in 85 and 49-3 in 86. In 1990 at San Fran the LT Giants ended the 3 peat dreams of the 49ers 15-13.

 

Lt's teams also lost to the Niners in the playoffs 3 times(coincidentally with three different coaches) they lost 38-24 in 1981(year San Fran won SB) they lost 38-24. In 1984 they lost 21-10(another year San Fran won SB) and of course in Lt's last game the Niners beat them 44-3 in San Fran.

 

I think if anything the telling stat here is that the Parcells coached, Belichick coordinated LT Giants were 3-1 vs the Niners of the 80's. Not bad when you consider that was one of the all time great teams in football, In fact I would bet that no team was at orabove .500 vs the Niners in the playoffs in that 81-94 time span.

 

As far as the SKins go, we can get a little more in depth here as they played twice a year every year in Lt's career.

81 1-1

82 0-2

83 0-2

84 1-1

85 1-1

86 2-0 and 1-0 in the only playoff game the 2 teams played in the LT era.

87 0-1(I refuse as should anyone to count the game played with scabs in week 4 of the 87 season)

88 2-0

89 2-0

90 2-0

91 0-2

92 1-1

93 2-0

 

So in Lt's 13seasons his teams were 14-11 vs the SKins in the rgular season and 1-0 vs them in the playoffs. Because I think that a lot of all these teams success(Niners and SKins) is due to the fact that they had great coaching we can also look at the Giants record vs the SKins with Parcells and Belichick coaching LT and that is 10-5 and 1-0 in the playoffs.

 

I think its clear to see that the Giants and LT had their fair share of success vs the elite NFC teams of the 80's and early 90's. What the Giants were guilty of is probably not capitalizing in 88 or 89 and winning another SB and that strike of 87 killed them.

 

Great stats. More specifically, and a big reason why I believe LT is the best I've seen, is his PERSONAL stats. During his tenure, (82-through 93, 81 didnt record personal sacks) he recorded 132 sacks, and thats not including 81. Those are DLineman #'s. For an LB thats astounding. More specifically, heres a breakdown:

 

 

82'- 7.5

83'-9.0

84'-11.5

85'-13.0

86'-20.5

87'-12.0

88'-15.5

89'-15.0

90'-10.0

91'-7.0

92'-50.

93'-6.0

 

84-90 he never recorded less than 10 sacks. That was when not only our division was so tough, but the niners and Bears were powerhouses. So, LT was definatley a main focus for these teams, and Im quite sure, was the single source they pulled out everything to try and stop. Because the #'s show that LT was reeking havoc on teams, but as we all know, it takes more than 1 player to win it all.

[ksm7]

Lt's teams beat the Niners in the playoffs in 85, 86 and 90. Twice at home. In the home contests the best offense of that era failed to score a TD, falling 17-3 in 85 and 49-3 in 86. In 1990 at San Fran the LT Giants ended the 3 peat dreams of the 49ers 15-13.

 

Lt's teams also lost to the Niners in the playoffs 3 times(coincidentally with three different coaches) they lost 38-24 in 1981(year San Fran won SB) they lost 38-24. In 1984 they lost 21-10(another year San Fran won SB) and of course in Lt's last game the Niners beat them 44-3 in San Fran.

 

I think if anything the telling stat here is that the Parcells coached, Belichick coordinated LT Giants were 3-1 vs the Niners of the 80's. Not bad when you consider that was one of the all time great teams in football, In fact I would bet that no team was at orabove .500 vs the Niners in the playoffs in that 81-94 time span.

 

As far as the SKins go, we can get a little more in depth here as they played twice a year every year in Lt's career.

81 1-1

82 0-2

83 0-2

84 1-1

85 1-1

86 2-0 and 1-0 in the only playoff game the 2 teams played in the LT era.

87 0-1(I refuse as should anyone to count the game played with scabs in week 4 of the 87 season)

88 2-0

89 2-0

90 2-0

91 0-2

92 1-1

93 2-0

 

So in Lt's 13seasons his teams were 14-11 vs the SKins in the rgular season and 1-0 vs them in the playoffs. Because I think that a lot of all these teams success(Niners and SKins) is due to the fact that they had great coaching we can also look at the Giants record vs the SKins with Parcells and Belichick coaching LT and that is 10-5 and 1-0 in the playoffs.

 

I think its clear to see that the Giants and LT had their fair share of success vs the elite NFC teams of the 80's and early 90's. What the Giants were guilty of is probably not capitalizing in 88 or 89 and winning another SB and that strike of 87 killed them.

 

well done...The Dog likes it...however, since Taylor's success seems to directly coincide with his time spent with good coaching, doesn't that lend creedance to the idea that it was the schemes utilizing Taylor's strengths and not just the fact that he was a good linebacker that made the difference? That being said, is he truely the best linebacker ever, or a great player that benefited most from a coaching staff that developed schemes to play to his strengths? Also, isn't it fair to say that Gibbs and Walsh et. all developed schemes to counter the developed schemes of the Giants staff, and not so much for what Taylor was doing on his own?

[BIGBLUE01]

well done...The Dog likes it...however, since Taylor's success seems to directly coincide with his time spent with good coaching, doesn't that lend creedance to the idea that it was the schemes utilizing Taylor's strengths and not just the fact that he was a good linebacker that made the difference? That being said, is he truely the best linebacker ever, or a great player that benefited most from a coaching staff that developed schemes to play to his strengths? Also, isn't it fair to say that Gibbs and Walsh et. all developed schemes to counter the developed schemes of the Giants staff, and not so much for what Taylor was doing on his own?

 

 

OMG, remember when I say all you want to do is contradict??

 

Youre kiddin me, right? No matter how ridiculous, you'll string anything together just to not agree, astounding.

 

Like youve said before, doesnt the coaching apply to ALL players?? Of course he benefited from great coaching, as Deion did. But it was still him out there terrorizing.

[Nesta]

well done...The Dog likes it...however, since Taylor's success seems to directly coincide with his time spent with good coaching, doesn't that lend creedance to the idea that it was the schemes utilizing Taylor's strengths and not just the fact that he was a good linebacker that made the difference? That being said, is he truely the best linebacker ever, or a great player that benefited most from a coaching staff that developed schemes to play to his strengths? Also, isn't it fair to say that Gibbs and Walsh et. all developed schemes to counter the developed schemes of the Giants staff, and not so much for what Taylor was doing on his own?

 

 

Systems don't produce all-pros for 10 years straight.

[randoff]

For the record BigBlue - the letters "FYI" are actually an abbreviation for the phrase "for your information"...The Dog is just being proactive in ensuring that you are not confused by this...

What are y'all a package deal? I'm starting to wonder IF you two posters don't work in the same office??

 

(Insert smiley face...for the 'fun factor')

[BIGBLUE01]

Heres an interesting article on Shawn Merriman. And the standard they go by for an OLB is.......OH look! Its LT.

 

 

 

Just how good is Shawne Merriman?

By Robert Rousseau on August 30, 2006 12:44 AM

Permalink | Comments (10) | Email This Article | RSS | [+] More Chargers News

 

There will never, ever be another Lawrence Taylor.

 

Despite this fact, every time another athletic pass-rushing outside linebacker comes into the NFL, people start trying to compare them to him. Derrick Thomas was supposed to be the next Lawrence Taylor; Junior Seau was supposed to be the next Lawrence Taylor; low and behold, even Taylor's former coach, Bill Parcells, seems to want to jump on the bandwagon, likening Cowboys outside linebacker DeMarcus Ware to him. Thus far, it's all been rubbish. After all, anyone that got to watch Taylor play with any level of consistency knows the truth.

 

Lawrence Taylor has not been matched by anyone, ever, in the history of the game at the outside linebacker position. He was simply too athletic, too confident and too vicious; LT was the total package, and he did it for a long time. Perhaps the reason for all the comparisons is that people tend to remember him for the way he revolutionized the position in terms of the pass rush. Still, to define him simply by the pass rush is to miss the point.

 

Taylor ran down ball carriers like no other; he hit like a crazed dog, and he invented the overhand strip from behind (how many quarterbacks woke up on the sideline after losing the ball to that move?).

 

Derrick Thomas was an excellent pass rusher that couldn't even compare to Taylor's tenacity and hitting ability. Seau couldn't touch Taylor's pass-rushing skills. Ware has shown promise, but come on. . .

 

So there will never be another Lawrence Taylor. End of story.

 

Still, perhaps, for the first time, a player has broken onto the scene that deserves a tad less laughter when the comparison is made. Still some giggling because it's so early in the game, but not one of those full-fledged belly laughs. No, this player will never be another Lawrence Taylor, but just maybe there is something to the comparison this time.

 

His name is Shawne Merriman.

 

First, Merriman has the same brash confidence.

 

According to an Aug. 25 article by Kevin Acee in the San Diego Union-Tribune, Merriman said the following: "I have respect for Lawrence Taylor, Derrick Thomas, all the guys who did it for so long, and especially Junior Seau. I enjoyed watching him as I was growing up. But I'm bigger and I'm stronger and I'm faster, and I can make more things happen. I play the game to be the best. When I'm all said and done, whatever year it is, I want to be looked at as the best linebacker that ever played and as a linebacker who changed the game."

 

Sounds a little like Taylor. Of course, plenty of players these days have confidence. Too many. Doesn't mean much unless you can back it up.

 

So far so good on that front, though. During a rookie season where Merriman won the Associated Press Defensive Rookie of the Year Award and played in the Pro Bowl, he accumulated 57 total tackles with 10 sacks (not to mention four pass deflections and two forced fumbles). Keep in mind that Merriman did this after missing training camp. Heck, he didn't even start until Week 7. Amazing.

 

Further, like Taylor, Merriman has the physical attributes to change the game. While Taylor was a more athletic linebacker than any before him, Merriman is a bigger athlete than those that have come before him. At 6-foot-4 and 272 pounds, he's a load that NFL offenses just aren't ready to deal with. Like Taylor, he's able to do things because of his physical attributes and athleticism that give offensive coordinators big trouble.

 

Here's the final reason to think that there's something to the comparison. Taylor used to play his best when it counted. It just so happens that thus far, Merriman has played very well in big games. For example, on Week 15 against the then undefeated Indianapolis Colts , he accumulated two sacks and two tackles for loss. Further, if you saw him in this game, he looked like a runaway freight train, nearly unstoppable (something the stats can't possibly do justice to). Nasty, athletic and a very hard hitter. A defensive player so talented that viewers find themselves watching him more than the offense.

 

So is Merriman the next Lawrence Taylor? No, like Michael Jordan, there will never be another Lawrence Taylor. But can he be a player that special? Can he be the kind of linebacker that deserves a spot on the same platform? Only if he can keep this type of thing up for a heckuva lot longer. No definite, for sure.

 

He's off to a good start, though.

 

 

 

 

This guy said himself, all you gotta do is watch him play, and you know.

 

And he's a Charger reporter!

[Sephiroth]

Also, isn't it fair to say that Gibbs and Walsh et. all developed schemes to counter the developed schemes of the Giants staff, and not so much for what Taylor was doing on his own?

 

If by "developing schemes" you mean, "block him with a guard, tackle, and tight end, and leave the RB in just in case."

 

I'm not shitting you. He was triple-teamed for almost his entire career.

[ksm7]

Heres an interesting article on Shawn Merriman. And the standard they go by for an OLB is.......OH look! Its LT.

Just how good is Shawne Merriman?

By Robert Rousseau on August 30, 2006 12:44 AM

Permalink | Comments (10) | Email This Article | RSS | [+] More Chargers News

 

There will never, ever be another Lawrence Taylor.

 

Despite this fact, every time another athletic pass-rushing outside linebacker comes into the NFL, people start trying to compare them to him. Derrick Thomas was supposed to be the next Lawrence Taylor; Junior Seau was supposed to be the next Lawrence Taylor; low and behold, even Taylor's former coach, Bill Parcells, seems to want to jump on the bandwagon, likening Cowboys outside linebacker DeMarcus Ware to him. Thus far, it's all been rubbish. After all, anyone that got to watch Taylor play with any level of consistency knows the truth.

 

Lawrence Taylor has not been matched by anyone, ever, in the history of the game at the outside linebacker position. He was simply too athletic, too confident and too vicious; LT was the total package, and he did it for a long time. Perhaps the reason for all the comparisons is that people tend to remember him for the way he revolutionized the position in terms of the pass rush. Still, to define him simply by the pass rush is to miss the point.

 

Taylor ran down ball carriers like no other; he hit like a crazed dog, and he invented the overhand strip from behind (how many quarterbacks woke up on the sideline after losing the ball to that move?).

 

Derrick Thomas was an excellent pass rusher that couldn't even compare to Taylor's tenacity and hitting ability. Seau couldn't touch Taylor's pass-rushing skills. Ware has shown promise, but come on. . .

 

So there will never be another Lawrence Taylor. End of story.

 

Still, perhaps, for the first time, a player has broken onto the scene that deserves a tad less laughter when the comparison is made. Still some giggling because it's so early in the game, but not one of those full-fledged belly laughs. No, this player will never be another Lawrence Taylor, but just maybe there is something to the comparison this time.

 

His name is Shawne Merriman.

 

First, Merriman has the same brash confidence.

 

According to an Aug. 25 article by Kevin Acee in the San Diego Union-Tribune, Merriman said the following: "I have respect for Lawrence Taylor, Derrick Thomas, all the guys who did it for so long, and especially Junior Seau. I enjoyed watching him as I was growing up. But I'm bigger and I'm stronger and I'm faster, and I can make more things happen. I play the game to be the best. When I'm all said and done, whatever year it is, I want to be looked at as the best linebacker that ever played and as a linebacker who changed the game."

 

Sounds a little like Taylor. Of course, plenty of players these days have confidence. Too many. Doesn't mean much unless you can back it up.

 

So far so good on that front, though. During a rookie season where Merriman won the Associated Press Defensive Rookie of the Year Award and played in the Pro Bowl, he accumulated 57 total tackles with 10 sacks (not to mention four pass deflections and two forced fumbles). Keep in mind that Merriman did this after missing training camp. Heck, he didn't even start until Week 7. Amazing.

 

Further, like Taylor, Merriman has the physical attributes to change the game. While Taylor was a more athletic linebacker than any before him, Merriman is a bigger athlete than those that have come before him. At 6-foot-4 and 272 pounds, he's a load that NFL offenses just aren't ready to deal with. Like Taylor, he's able to do things because of his physical attributes and athleticism that give offensive coordinators big trouble.

 

Here's the final reason to think that there's something to the comparison. Taylor used to play his best when it counted. It just so happens that thus far, Merriman has played very well in big games. For example, on Week 15 against the then undefeated Indianapolis Colts , he accumulated two sacks and two tackles for loss. Further, if you saw him in this game, he looked like a runaway freight train, nearly unstoppable (something the stats can't possibly do justice to). Nasty, athletic and a very hard hitter. A defensive player so talented that viewers find themselves watching him more than the offense.

 

So is Merriman the next Lawrence Taylor? No, like Michael Jordan, there will never be another Lawrence Taylor. But can he be a player that special? Can he be the kind of linebacker that deserves a spot on the same platform? Only if he can keep this type of thing up for a heckuva lot longer. No definite, for sure.

 

He's off to a good start, though.

 

 

This guy said himself, all you gotta do is watch him play, and you know.

 

And he's a Charger reporter!

 

See that, an individual reporter who has an opinion and actually backed it up with a well thought out argument siting actual factual information...that is all the Dog has been asking for...

[ksm7]

 

Systems don't produce all-pros for 10 years straight.

 

Not in all cases, but the Dog is pretty sure that Terrel Davis might just be one example...along those lines, John Elway was most productive playing in the west coast offense once Shanahan implemented it, after years of sturggling under Reeves and then Philips systems...and one is left to wonder if Joe Montana would have had the career he did playing in a different system...

[BIGBLUE01]

See that, an individual reporter who has an opinion and actually backed it up with a well thought out argument siting actual factual information...that is all the Dog has been asking for...

 

Dog, for some reason, you never noticed posts were I supplied facts, stats,, well thought out arguments, etc. Most of the time replying to you, I just give you shit. Ive always done this. Its called posting w/ blinders on. lol!

[RaginCaucasian]

and one is left to wonder if Joe Montana would have had the career he did playing in a different system...

One doesn't have to wonder, Montana played in two vastly different offenses..... the 49'ers west coast scheme and the ultra-conservative "Martyball" in Kansas City.

 

These are his stats for comparison.......... since you can't seem to do any homework of your own. Must be that "mental defect" you suffer from.

[BIGBLUE01]

One doesn't have to wonder, Montana played in two vastly different offenses..... the 49'ers west coast scheme and the ultra-conservative "Martyball" in Kansas City.

 

These are his stats for comparison.......... since you can't seem to do any homework of your own. Must be that "mental defect" you suffer from.

 

Hey ragin, Im on your side, dont forget.

 

I clicked on that link, but I cant find out where to view his stats, can you help?

[RaginCaucasian]

Hey ragin, Im on your side, dont forget.

 

I clicked on that link, but I cant find out where to view his stats, can you help?

Right next to biography, click on statistics..... viola.

[BIGBLUE01]

Right next to biography, click on statistics..... viola.

Ahhhh, thanks.

[Herc]

guess dog and egg aren't at work today

[ksm7]

Dog, for some reason, you never noticed posts were I supplied facts, stats,, well thought out arguments, etc. Most of the time replying to you, I just give you shit. Ive always done this. Its called posting w/ blinders on. lol!

 

well now, the Dog wonders: wouldn't have just been easier if you share the same perspective as the reporter in the above article to have stated this, rather then insist that just because it is your opinion, you shouldn't have to add anything supportive? By handling it as you did, it leaves the impression that you struggle to have an original thought, and well, that in turn just takes up a lot of time...

[ksm7]

One doesn't have to wonder, Montana played in two vastly different offenses..... the 49'ers west coast scheme and the ultra-conservative "Martyball" in Kansas City.

 

These are his stats for comparison.......... since you can't seem to do any homework of your own. Must be that "mental defect" you suffer from.

 

Good for you. The Dog wonders, would you be so kind as to do some more homework and detail the type of offensive system that the Chiefs were running at the time? You're a real peach...

[ksm7]

One doesn't have to wonder, Montana played in two vastly different offenses..... the 49'ers west coast scheme and the ultra-conservative "Martyball" in Kansas City.

 

These are his stats for comparison.......... since you can't seem to do any homework of your own. Must be that "mental defect" you suffer from.

 

By the way, the Dog can do some research...from an article which the Dog would be more then happy to provide for you:

 

 

In order to ensure the health of Montana, who always seemed one hit away from a forced retirement Schottenheimer put reins on the highly sophisticated West Coast offense, which works best when all five receivers are out in patterns. After a midseason loss to the Bills, a game in which Bruce Smith nearly beheaded Montana, K.C.'s West Coast offense turned into the conservative, Bob Dole, Midwest offense, often sending out just two receivers.

 

You see, Shottenheimer was running the west coast style of offense during Montana's years, but pulled in the reigns on it to better protect him health wise...perhaps you need assistance with research...here's an idea, have BibBlue help you, he seems to be a big fan of research, fact-based debating...

[BadEgg]

Hey ragin, Im on your side, dont forget.

 

I clicked on that link, but I cant find out where to view his stats, can you help?

 

OMG, BigBlue!

 

Hit statistics...S-T-A-T-I-S-T-I-C-S...

 

If you cannot find the word "statistics" contact the tech people in your office to ensure that your PC has been turned on...

[Nesta]

Not in all cases, but the Dog is pretty sure that Terrel Davis might just be one example...along those lines, John Elway was most productive playing in the west coast offense once Shanahan implemented it, after years of sturggling under Reeves and then Philips systems...and one is left to wonder if Joe Montana would have had the career he did playing in a different system...

 

The dog might note that Davis was a probowler a mere 3 times. Elway, 9, but they weren't consecutive years. To make this argument concerning LT, shows just how little the dog knows about LT or the Giants.

 

So which teams does the dog know a thing or two about?

[RaginCaucasian]

Good for you. The Dog wonders, would you be so kind as to do some more homework and detail the type of offensive system that the Chiefs were running at the time? You're a real peach...

OK Mr. Mental Weakling since you again can't get anything done on your own here you are; I'll put the important stuff in big colorful letters so someone with a 3'rd grade reading capacity (you and eggy) can understand it:

 

 

This is what Montana played under in Kansas City

Schottenheimer's Marty Ball parameters are well documented in grammatically correct and perfectly bound volumes. Establish the run. Pass only to set up the run. Win the turnover count. And win the field position tug-of-war. "What I call my favorite football play -- a running play -- we call 40 or 50 power and we called it 15 times today," Schottenheimer said.

 

This is the system employed while in San Fransisco

The initial Walsh concept was for a standard pro-set offense -- two backs in split alignment, two wide receivers and a tight end -- designed to get the ball quickly from the quarterback to the skill-position players. The idea was to release all five of the eligible receivers at the same time, relying on three- and five-step drops by the quarterback to compensate for most blocking breakdowns, and to throw the ball crisply and on the break.

 

 

By the way, the Dog can do some research...from an article which the Dog would be more then happy to provide for you:

In order to ensure the health of Montana, who always seemed one hit away from a forced retirement Schottenheimer put reins on the highly sophisticated West Coast offense, which works best when all five receivers are out in patterns. After a midseason loss to the Bills, a game in which Bruce Smith nearly beheaded Montana, K.C.'s West Coast offense turned into the conservative, Bob Dole, Midwest offense, often sending out just two receivers.

 

You see, Shottenheimer was running the west coast style of offense during Montana's years, but pulled in the reigns on it to better protect him health wise...perhaps you need assistance with research...here's an idea, have BibBlue help you, he seems to be a big fan of research, fact-based debating...

 

 

For the record you almost had a point except:

 

Ultimately, Schottenheimer changed his offense in 1993, when he brought in Paul Hackett who installed the West Coast scheme of the San Francisco 49ers that was heavy on passing.

 

Montana retired at the end of the year........ oooooppppppsssss

 

So Schottenheimer ran a West Coast offense in KC for 8 games? Good point.... that really helped your argument

 

You almost had a point...... numbnuts :bye:

 

P.S. I added all the smileys so your after school play date buddy/alter ego eggy could get all that. Run along now and get on the short bus.

[BIGBLUE01]

OMG, BigBlue!

 

Hit statistics...S-T-A-T-I-S-T-I-C-S...

 

If you cannot find the word "statistics" contact the tech people in your office to ensure that your PC has been turned on...

 

Shut the fuck up. I didnt see it the first time I looked.

 

Badegg, youre jealous of me, just admit it.

[BIGBLUE01]

well now, the Dog wonders: wouldn't have just been easier if you share the same perspective as the reporter in the above article to have stated this, rather then insist that just because it is your opinion, you shouldn't have to add anything supportive? By handling it as you did, it leaves the impression that you struggle to have an original thought, and well, that in turn just takes up a lot of time...

[BIGBLUE01]

well now, the Dog wonders: wouldn't have just been easier if you share the same perspective as the reporter in the above article to have stated this, rather then insist that just because it is your opinion, you shouldn't have to add anything supportive? By handling it as you did, it leaves the impression that you struggle to have an original thought, and well, that in turn just takes up a lot of time...

 

OK, youre just messin with me, or you are extremely clueless. Sooner or later, Im gonna get this through your head. NOT ONCE, did I say I shouldnt have to offer anything supportive. I have been posting on here, and other sites w/ most on here, for some time now. You and badegg just recently jumped in alot of the convos we've been engaged in lately. Since our little feuds, and your resistance to admit to your team, I have been pretty blunt, trash talkative and have purposely gone to any lengths to not provide you, a possible rival, any info. Not because Im LIMITED, but because I dont owe you anything. Now if you were to witness on a daily basis what I post, you would see that sometimes its a lengthy discussion with facts, sometimes its just goofin around, whatever. But every time I post, there isnt always the need to post lengthy, stat filled replies. For example, if I get a free minute at wk, and I jump on, and I see a topic about our WR corps. And I then see, oh, randoff lets say, post a WHOLE reply filled with stats, facts, years, player averages etc., why would I proceed to post a reply with all the same info? Esp. if I agrre with him? Wouldnt it be much easier to just say, "I agree?"

 

Now, thats for the Dog that might not be gettin it. For the Dog I believe Im dealing with, the one that just wants to give me shit, HAHA, bring it on. Its fun.