gemint - Well we can agree just to disagree about Ben. Again, I'm not saying he will never be a top tier QB, I'm just saying I believe he's not there yet and I believe it's obvious that their system benefits QB's by not asking much from them. No, not just any QB can do it. Kordell sucked as bad as any QB I have ever seen in the NFL, but the fact that their team was still competitive during his stay reiterates to me what I'm saying. Further, Maddox never could do anything until he came to Pittsburgh. Sure, he did put up some numbers but he was a first round draft pick in '92 so not many doubted there was always some kind of potential. But one cannot deny his career was a failure until he went to the Steelers. Batch... a total NFL joke. While with Detroit, he was not even mediocre. He wasn't mobile. He wasn't accurate. He couldn't lead. He was worse that Harrington and that's saying something. He goes to Pittsburgh and looks like he's almost an average NFL QB. He was 2-0 this year. Granted, not against the greatest competition but he put up extremely minimal numbers in those 2 games and they still won. Pittsburgh wins most games because they usually have a top 5 defense. That's been their fortay for quite a while. And offensively, they run as good as anybody. They were 5th in the league this year running the ball during the regular season and second in yards/game in the playoffs. They were second in the league in 2004... In 2003, they were 31st and coincidentally, they didn't make the playoffs. 2002, second in the league... Now as for their passing, they were 25th in yards/game this year and 28th last year, both well down near the bottom of the league. Of course in 2003 when they sucked at running, they were 13th in the league in passing and that is the year they failed to make the playoffs.
Again, all I'm saying is that Roethlisberger isn't generally expected to do much in most games. That's not his fault, it's a product of their coaching schemes. He isn't thrown in a position to have to win most of their games, so he doesn't make as many mistakes. Their team has been rarely behind by much lately, so he doesn't kill his QB rating by being forced to throw the ball all over the field for 2 quarters like many other QB's do. If you look at the overall QB rating leaders for the season and not include minimum snaps, the top 8 guys are either running backs, receivers or backup QB's with VERY few snaps. This is likely because they aren't usually asked to throw passes in many difficult situations, so their numbers are inflated. Roethlisberger threw about half the amount of passes that the other league leading QB's did. He was ranked 30th in the league in attempts and 21st in yards. Sure, he was injured but even if you added his 22 passes a game to the 4 games he missed, he's still about 100-175 attempts off from most of the other starting QB's and that would still only rank him around 24th in attempts and the other players below him almost all would have missed more games than him except for Brad Johnson. Add his 199 yards a game for the 4 games missed and he would still only be right around 15th in yards/game, and nearly all of the players ahead of him were still playoff QB's. Roethlisberger was 28th in the league last year in attempts and 22nd in yards in 14 starts. You see, he's basically asked to do less than any other playoff caliber team asks of their QB.
<< <i>Oh, you're a steelers fan this year? How convenient. No, they didn't win, they had the refs hand it to them. >>
Axtell you've gone off the deep end. You're now a bigger clown than JoeStalin.
What happened? You're weren't this big of an idiot a year ago. >>
It's easy to see how the repeated (questionable) calls against the Seahawks cost them many points and the game.
It's too bad you're too blinded by your dislike for me to see the facts out there. And I went off the deep end? So 70% of the country that was polled (over 100K people) have gone off the deep end too?
<< <i>gemint - Well we can agree just to disagree about Ben. Again, I'm not saying he will never be a top tier QB, I'm just saying I believe he's not there yet and I believe it's obvious that their system benefits QB's by not asking much from them. No, not just any QB can do it. Kordell sucked as bad as any QB I have ever seen in the NFL, but the fact that their team was still competitive during his stay reiterates to me what I'm saying. Further, Maddox never could do anything until he came to Pittsburgh. Sure, he did put up some numbers but he was a first round draft pick in '92 so not many doubted there was always some kind of potential. But one cannot deny his career was a failure until he went to the Steelers. Batch... a total NFL joke. While with Detroit, he was not even mediocre. He wasn't mobile. He wasn't accurate. He couldn't lead. He was worse that Harrington and that's saying something. He goes to Pittsburgh and looks like he's almost an average NFL QB. He was 2-0 this year. Granted, not against the greatest competition but he put up extremely minimal numbers in those 2 games and they still won. Pittsburgh wins most games because they usually have a top 5 defense. That's been their fortay for quite a while. And offensively, they run as good as anybody. They were 5th in the league this year running the ball during the regular season and second in yards/game in the playoffs. They were second in the league in 2004... In 2003, they were 31st and coincidentally, they didn't make the playoffs. 2002, second in the league... Now as for their passing, they were 25th in yards/game this year and 28th last year, both well down near the bottom of the league. Of course in 2003 when they sucked at running, they were 13th in the league in passing and that is the year they failed to make the playoffs.
Again, all I'm saying is that Roethlisberger isn't generally expected to do much in most games. That's not his fault, it's a product of their coaching schemes. He isn't thrown in a position to have to win most of their games, so he doesn't make as many mistakes. Their team has been rarely behind by much lately, so he doesn't kill his QB rating by being forced to throw the ball all over the field for 2 quarters like many other QB's do. If you look at the overall QB rating leaders for the season and not include minimum snaps, the top 8 guys are either running backs, receivers or backup QB's with VERY few snaps. This is likely because they aren't usually asked to throw passes in many difficult situations, so their numbers are inflated. Roethlisberger threw about half the amount of passes that the other league leading QB's did. He was ranked 30th in the league in attempts and 21st in yards. Sure, he was injured but even if you added his 22 passes a game to the 4 games he missed, he's still about 100-175 attempts off from most of the other starting QB's and that would still only rank him around 24th in attempts and the other players below him almost all would have missed more games than him except for Brad Johnson. Add his 199 yards a game for the 4 games missed and he would still only be right around 15th in yards/game, and nearly all of the players ahead of him were still playoff QB's. Roethlisberger was 28th in the league last year in attempts and 22nd in yards in 14 starts. You see, he's basically asked to do less than any other playoff caliber team asks of their QB. >>
Fair enough. I would take a few exceptions though. Maddox went off and stared in the arena league and XFL where he learned how to make quick reads. He wasn't successful because he had a strong running game. In fact, the running game was pretty weak in 2003 due to so many injuries on the line. Maddox still played decently. I won't argue that having the defense geared up to stop the run will make passing easier. However, many of the great QBs have strong running games as well. Nobody claims Favre was great because he had Ahman Green behind him but forcing the defense to respect the run is a basic requirement for having a successful passing game. Most good QBs have had good to great running backs behind them.
If you extrapolate Ben's three playoff games this year out to a 16 game season, it translates to 261 completions, 384 attempts, 3626 yards, 37 TDs, 5 INTs. Pretty respectable. Hardly the numbers of a game manager.
<< <i>I don't dislike you, I feel sorry for you. >>
Oh, a pity party?
<< <i> I'm not talking about the Super Bowl calls. I'm talking about all of your posts. Anti-Yankee, Anti-Steeler, etc.
You've lost it.
edited to add:
<< <i>So 70% of the country that was polled (over 100K people) have gone off the deep end too? >>
I'm guessing 90% of them are Seahawks fans, so yes, they have. >>
Really? Are you that blind to the furor that still has football fans up in arms over the calls of this game? The only people who aren't complaining are the Stealer fans who are happy with the win, no matter what.
You cannot be serious in thinking that 90k Seahawk fans voted...talk about losing it! Watch some TV, listen to some radio, and see just how disturbed football (non-Stealer) fans are about the concerns about officiating in this game.
The player doesn't need replay BECAUSE HE'S RIGHT THERE.
And this gem made my day!
<< <i>Maddox went off and stared in the arena league and XFL where he learned how to make quick reads. >>
Hahahahahah the XFL and Arena league? hahahaha
<< <i>If you extrapolate Ben's three playoff games this year out to a 16 game season, it translates to 261 completions, 384 attempts, 3626 yards, 37 TDs, 5 INTs. Pretty respectable. Hardly the numbers of a game manager. >>
Really? 3 games over 16? How about extrapolating out his super bowl performance to a 16 game season?
He's a game manager, not a game winner. He's asked not to lose games, NOT win them. HUGE difference.
<< <i>Fair enough. I would take a few exceptions though. Maddox went off and stared in the arena league and XFL where he learned how to make quick reads. He wasn't successful because he had a strong running game. In fact, the running game was pretty weak in 2003 due to so many injuries on the line. Maddox still played decently. I won't argue that having the defense geared up to stop the run will make passing easier. However, many of the great QBs have strong running games as well. Nobody claims Favre was great because he had Ahman Green behind him but forcing the defense to respect the run is a basic requirement for having a successful passing game. Most good QBs have had good to great running backs behind them.
If you extrapolate Ben's three playoff games this year out to a 16 game season, it translates to 261 completions, 384 attempts, 3626 yards, 37 TDs, 5 INTs. Pretty respectable. Hardly the numbers of a game manager. >>
Well as I mentioned, the Steelers running game was terrible in 2003... That would be why (in my opinion) Maddox had such a big season for himself. He was forced to throw a lot more because they couldn't run. But they ended up with a lousy record, mainly because they couldn't run and they had a subpar QB running the show. Granted, Favre has Ahman but he was winning games long before Green showed up. They used to win with guys like Edgar Bennett because Favre was totally the man. Ahman sucked with Seattle, but now plays well behind Favre. But then look at their new guy (Cato I think his name is). A complete unknow who now looks like a stud. Why? Because everyone sits back to stop Favre... It's the reverse of Pitt and its situation. Their RB's in Green Bay look good because opponents gear up to stop Favre. Favre is a special QB. He has done a lot with a little IMO. They have had some good D's a while back, but they never had many of the offensive weapons many other teams did. I hate the Packers, but think Favre is one of the best the game has ever seen. Sure, he looked like crap last year and he may be done, but there are few QB's that will ever accomplish what this guy did in his career.
<< <i> Well as I mentioned, the Steelers running game was terrible in 2003... That would be why (in my opinion) Maddox had such a big season for himself. He was forced to throw a lot more because they couldn't run. But they ended up with a lousy record, mainly because they couldn't run and they had a subpar QB running the show. >>
Uhm...you say on one hand Maddox had a 'big deason for himself', then say they had a lousy record because of a subpar QB. So he had a big year, but it was because he had a big year? huh?
<< <i> Granted, Favre has Ahman but he was winning games long before Green showed up. They used to win with guys like Edgar Bennett because Favre was totally the man. Ahman sucked with Seattle, but now plays well behind Favre. But then look at their new guy (Cato I think his name is). A complete unknow who now looks like a stud. Why? Because everyone sits back to stop Favre. >>
Hmm you don't think it MIGHT be the fact that the offensive line in green bay blocks better than when Green played in seattle? A RBs success is not based solely on defenses sitting back and stopping the QB.
<< <i>It's the reverse of Pitt and its situation. Their RB's in Green Bay look good because opponents gear up to stop Favre. Favre is a special QB. He has done a lot with a little IMO. They have had some good D's a while back, but they never had many of the offensive weapons many other teams did. I hate the Packers, but think Favre is one of the best the game has ever seen. Sure, he looked like crap last year and he may be done, but there are few QB's that will ever accomplish what this guy did in his career. >>
<< <i> Well as I mentioned, the Steelers running game was terrible in 2003... That would be why (in my opinion) Maddox had such a big season for himself. He was forced to throw a lot more because they couldn't run. But they ended up with a lousy record, mainly because they couldn't run and they had a subpar QB running the show.
Uhm...you say on one hand Maddox had a 'big deason for himself', then say they had a lousy record because of a subpar QB. So he had a big year, but it was because he had a big year? huh? >>
I think I may have said season with an "s"... Maddox has proven to be a subpar quarterback throughout his career. But as we have seen, even bad quarterbacks can put up big numbers if forced to throw all of the time. Overall, they still didn't win that season when the ball was in his hands because he wasn't able to convert often enough in key situations. By big year, I simply meant yardage as he didn't have a great rating, had a completion percentage a little over 50% and his TD/interception ratio was nearly even at 18/17. Those are Harrington-like numbers, and I'm sure we can all agree that he's no superstar. Yardage was his only number that looked solid that year, but when you have to throw all of the time because you can't run those numbers are expected IMO.
<< <i>Granted, Favre has Ahman but he was winning games long before Green showed up. They used to win with guys like Edgar Bennett because Favre was totally the man. Ahman sucked with Seattle, but now plays well behind Favre. But then look at their new guy (Cato I think his name is). A complete unknow who now looks like a stud. Why? Because everyone sits back to stop Favre. >>
Hmm you don't think it MIGHT be the fact that the offensive line in green bay blocks better than when Green played in seattle? A RBs success is not based solely on defenses sitting back and stopping the QB. >>
Wow, no sh!t Sherlock. But I guarantee that over the last 10 years (with the exception of last year), every team had a main game plan to stop Favre and not whatever RB they had going at the time. That means that in normal running situations, teams still had to focus on him and possibly drop back an extra defender to defend against the possible pass. That's why Barry Sanders could never get a first down on 3rd and 1-2 yards. They never had a reliable QB or FB and everybody jammed the box knowing who was going to get it. If there was a real threat there for a QB to pass, his conversion percentage would have been much higher. Getting 1-2 yards on first down with 7 guys in the box isn't too hard for a guy like him. Getting it with 10-11 guys in the box is much harder. It's not a difficult concept to understand...
<< <i>It's the reverse of Pitt and its situation. Their RB's in Green Bay look good because opponents gear up to stop Favre. Favre is a special QB. He has done a lot with a little IMO. They have had some good D's a while back, but they never had many of the offensive weapons many other teams did. I hate the Packers, but think Favre is one of the best the game has ever seen. Sure, he looked like crap last year and he may be done, but there are few QB's that will ever accomplish what this guy did in his career.
What is the reverse of the situation with Pitt? >>
Well lets figure it out. If I say that in Green Bay the RB's look better because of the QB and his talents, than the reverse would be that the QB looks better in Pittsburgh because of the RB's talents, wouldn't it? That wasn't so hard to figure out now, was it?
Comments
And my team (Bucs) WON the super bowl, they didn't have it handed to them by the refs.
<< <i>Watch the letterman interview...his first one before he was coached by his team to say he made it in.
And my team (Bucs) WON the super bowl, they didn't have it handed to them by the refs. >>
You mean before he actually saw the replay.
And my team (Steelers) WON the super bowl and won it five times.
Again, all I'm saying is that Roethlisberger isn't generally expected to do much in most games. That's not his fault, it's a product of their coaching schemes. He isn't thrown in a position to have to win most of their games, so he doesn't make as many mistakes. Their team has been rarely behind by much lately, so he doesn't kill his QB rating by being forced to throw the ball all over the field for 2 quarters like many other QB's do. If you look at the overall QB rating leaders for the season and not include minimum snaps, the top 8 guys are either running backs, receivers or backup QB's with VERY few snaps. This is likely because they aren't usually asked to throw passes in many difficult situations, so their numbers are inflated. Roethlisberger threw about half the amount of passes that the other league leading QB's did. He was ranked 30th in the league in attempts and 21st in yards. Sure, he was injured but even if you added his 22 passes a game to the 4 games he missed, he's still about 100-175 attempts off from most of the other starting QB's and that would still only rank him around 24th in attempts and the other players below him almost all would have missed more games than him except for Brad Johnson. Add his 199 yards a game for the 4 games missed and he would still only be right around 15th in yards/game, and nearly all of the players ahead of him were still playoff QB's. Roethlisberger was 28th in the league last year in attempts and 22nd in yards in 14 starts. You see, he's basically asked to do less than any other playoff caliber team asks of their QB.
<< <i>
You mean before he actually saw the replay.
And my team (Steelers) WON the super bowl and won it five times. >>
Oh, you're a steelers fan this year? How convenient. No, they didn't win, they had the refs hand it to them.
And a player doesn't need to see a replay...they know. They don't need a replay to tell them whether or not they made a play.
<< <i>Oh, you're a steelers fan this year? How convenient. No, they didn't win, they had the refs hand it to them. >>
Axtell you've gone off the deep end. You're now a bigger clown than JoeStalin.
What happened? You're weren't this big of an idiot a year ago.
<< <i>
<< <i>Oh, you're a steelers fan this year? How convenient. No, they didn't win, they had the refs hand it to them. >>
Axtell you've gone off the deep end. You're now a bigger clown than JoeStalin.
What happened? You're weren't this big of an idiot a year ago. >>
It's easy to see how the repeated (questionable) calls against the Seahawks cost them many points and the game.
It's too bad you're too blinded by your dislike for me to see the facts out there. And I went off the deep end? So 70% of the country that was polled (over 100K people) have gone off the deep end too?
YOU, sir, are the CLOWN.
I'm not talking about the Super Bowl calls. I'm talking about all of your posts. Anti-Yankee, Anti-Steeler, etc.
You've lost it.
edited to add:
<< <i>So 70% of the country that was polled (over 100K people) have gone off the deep end too? >>
I'm guessing 90% of them are Seahawks fans, so yes, they have.
<< <i>
<< <i>
You mean before he actually saw the replay.
And my team (Steelers) WON the super bowl and won it five times. >>
Oh, you're a steelers fan this year? How convenient. No, they didn't win, they had the refs hand it to them.
And a player doesn't need to see a replay...they know. They don't need a replay to tell them whether or not they made a play. >>
Sorry, I've been rooting for them since 1976 when I was a kid.
If the player doesn't need replays, why do refs?
<< <i>gemint - Well we can agree just to disagree about Ben. Again, I'm not saying he will never be a top tier QB, I'm just saying I believe he's not there yet and I believe it's obvious that their system benefits QB's by not asking much from them. No, not just any QB can do it. Kordell sucked as bad as any QB I have ever seen in the NFL, but the fact that their team was still competitive during his stay reiterates to me what I'm saying. Further, Maddox never could do anything until he came to Pittsburgh. Sure, he did put up some numbers but he was a first round draft pick in '92 so not many doubted there was always some kind of potential. But one cannot deny his career was a failure until he went to the Steelers. Batch... a total NFL joke. While with Detroit, he was not even mediocre. He wasn't mobile. He wasn't accurate. He couldn't lead. He was worse that Harrington and that's saying something. He goes to Pittsburgh and looks like he's almost an average NFL QB. He was 2-0 this year. Granted, not against the greatest competition but he put up extremely minimal numbers in those 2 games and they still won. Pittsburgh wins most games because they usually have a top 5 defense. That's been their fortay for quite a while. And offensively, they run as good as anybody. They were 5th in the league this year running the ball during the regular season and second in yards/game in the playoffs. They were second in the league in 2004... In 2003, they were 31st and coincidentally, they didn't make the playoffs. 2002, second in the league... Now as for their passing, they were 25th in yards/game this year and 28th last year, both well down near the bottom of the league. Of course in 2003 when they sucked at running, they were 13th in the league in passing and that is the year they failed to make the playoffs.
Again, all I'm saying is that Roethlisberger isn't generally expected to do much in most games. That's not his fault, it's a product of their coaching schemes. He isn't thrown in a position to have to win most of their games, so he doesn't make as many mistakes. Their team has been rarely behind by much lately, so he doesn't kill his QB rating by being forced to throw the ball all over the field for 2 quarters like many other QB's do. If you look at the overall QB rating leaders for the season and not include minimum snaps, the top 8 guys are either running backs, receivers or backup QB's with VERY few snaps. This is likely because they aren't usually asked to throw passes in many difficult situations, so their numbers are inflated. Roethlisberger threw about half the amount of passes that the other league leading QB's did. He was ranked 30th in the league in attempts and 21st in yards. Sure, he was injured but even if you added his 22 passes a game to the 4 games he missed, he's still about 100-175 attempts off from most of the other starting QB's and that would still only rank him around 24th in attempts and the other players below him almost all would have missed more games than him except for Brad Johnson. Add his 199 yards a game for the 4 games missed and he would still only be right around 15th in yards/game, and nearly all of the players ahead of him were still playoff QB's. Roethlisberger was 28th in the league last year in attempts and 22nd in yards in 14 starts. You see, he's basically asked to do less than any other playoff caliber team asks of their QB. >>
Fair enough. I would take a few exceptions though. Maddox went off and stared in the arena league and XFL where he learned how to make quick reads. He wasn't successful because he had a strong running game. In fact, the running game was pretty weak in 2003 due to so many injuries on the line. Maddox still played decently. I won't argue that having the defense geared up to stop the run will make passing easier. However, many of the great QBs have strong running games as well. Nobody claims Favre was great because he had Ahman Green behind him but forcing the defense to respect the run is a basic requirement for having a successful passing game. Most good QBs have had good to great running backs behind them.
If you extrapolate Ben's three playoff games this year out to a 16 game season, it translates to 261 completions, 384 attempts, 3626 yards, 37 TDs, 5 INTs. Pretty respectable. Hardly the numbers of a game manager.
<< <i>I don't dislike you, I feel sorry for you.
>>
Oh, a pity party?
<< <i>
I'm not talking about the Super Bowl calls. I'm talking about all of your posts. Anti-Yankee, Anti-Steeler, etc.
You've lost it.
edited to add:
<< <i>So 70% of the country that was polled (over 100K people) have gone off the deep end too? >>
I'm guessing 90% of them are Seahawks fans, so yes, they have. >>
Really? Are you that blind to the furor that still has football fans up in arms over the calls of this game? The only people who aren't complaining are the Stealer fans who are happy with the win, no matter what.
You cannot be serious in thinking that 90k Seahawk fans voted...talk about losing it! Watch some TV, listen to some radio, and see just how disturbed football (non-Stealer) fans are about the concerns about officiating in this game.
The player doesn't need replay BECAUSE HE'S RIGHT THERE.
And this gem made my day!
<< <i>Maddox went off and stared in the arena league and XFL where he learned how to make quick reads. >>
Hahahahahah the XFL and Arena league? hahahaha
<< <i>If you extrapolate Ben's three playoff games this year out to a 16 game season, it translates to 261 completions, 384 attempts, 3626 yards, 37 TDs, 5 INTs. Pretty respectable. Hardly the numbers of a game manager. >>
Really? 3 games over 16? How about extrapolating out his super bowl performance to a 16 game season?
He's a game manager, not a game winner. He's asked not to lose games, NOT win them. HUGE difference.
Is your icon real??? Is that even human???
<< <i>Fair enough. I would take a few exceptions though. Maddox went off and stared in the arena league and XFL where he learned how to make quick reads. He wasn't successful because he had a strong running game. In fact, the running game was pretty weak in 2003 due to so many injuries on the line. Maddox still played decently. I won't argue that having the defense geared up to stop the run will make passing easier. However, many of the great QBs have strong running games as well. Nobody claims Favre was great because he had Ahman Green behind him but forcing the defense to respect the run is a basic requirement for having a successful passing game. Most good QBs have had good to great running backs behind them.
If you extrapolate Ben's three playoff games this year out to a 16 game season, it translates to 261 completions, 384 attempts, 3626 yards, 37 TDs, 5 INTs. Pretty respectable. Hardly the numbers of a game manager. >>
Well as I mentioned, the Steelers running game was terrible in 2003... That would be why (in my opinion) Maddox had such a big season for himself. He was forced to throw a lot more because they couldn't run. But they ended up with a lousy record, mainly because they couldn't run and they had a subpar QB running the show. Granted, Favre has Ahman but he was winning games long before Green showed up. They used to win with guys like Edgar Bennett because Favre was totally the man. Ahman sucked with Seattle, but now plays well behind Favre. But then look at their new guy (Cato I think his name is). A complete unknow who now looks like a stud. Why? Because everyone sits back to stop Favre... It's the reverse of Pitt and its situation. Their RB's in Green Bay look good because opponents gear up to stop Favre. Favre is a special QB. He has done a lot with a little IMO. They have had some good D's a while back, but they never had many of the offensive weapons many other teams did. I hate the Packers, but think Favre is one of the best the game has ever seen. Sure, he looked like crap last year and he may be done, but there are few QB's that will ever accomplish what this guy did in his career.
I believe thats all it takes.
Clowns of America
But then, you're already a member, aren't you?
<< <i>
Well as I mentioned, the Steelers running game was terrible in 2003... That would be why (in my opinion) Maddox had such a big season for himself. He was forced to throw a lot more because they couldn't run. But they ended up with a lousy record, mainly because they couldn't run and they had a subpar QB running the show. >>
Uhm...you say on one hand Maddox had a 'big deason for himself', then say they had a lousy record because of a subpar QB. So he had a big year, but it was because he had a big year? huh?
<< <i>
Granted, Favre has Ahman but he was winning games long before Green showed up. They used to win with guys like Edgar Bennett because Favre was totally the man. Ahman sucked with Seattle, but now plays well behind Favre. But then look at their new guy (Cato I think his name is). A complete unknow who now looks like a stud. Why? Because everyone sits back to stop Favre. >>
Hmm you don't think it MIGHT be the fact that the offensive line in green bay blocks better than when Green played in seattle? A RBs success is not based solely on defenses sitting back and stopping the QB.
<< <i>It's the reverse of Pitt and its situation. Their RB's in Green Bay look good because opponents gear up to stop Favre. Favre is a special QB. He has done a lot with a little IMO. They have had some good D's a while back, but they never had many of the offensive weapons many other teams did. I hate the Packers, but think Favre is one of the best the game has ever seen. Sure, he looked like crap last year and he may be done, but there are few QB's that will ever accomplish what this guy did in his career.
>>
What is the reverse of the situation with Pitt?
<< <i>Clowns of America >>
Good one Brian.
<< <i>
<< <i>Clowns of America >>
Good one Brian. >>
I thought so.
<< <i>
Well as I mentioned, the Steelers running game was terrible in 2003... That would be why (in my opinion) Maddox had such a big season for himself. He was forced to throw a lot more because they couldn't run. But they ended up with a lousy record, mainly because they couldn't run and they had a subpar QB running the show.
Uhm...you say on one hand Maddox had a 'big deason for himself', then say they had a lousy record because of a subpar QB. So he had a big year, but it was because he had a big year? huh? >>
I think I may have said season with an "s"...
<< <i>Granted, Favre has Ahman but he was winning games long before Green showed up. They used to win with guys like Edgar Bennett because Favre was totally the man. Ahman sucked with Seattle, but now plays well behind Favre. But then look at their new guy (Cato I think his name is). A complete unknow who now looks like a stud. Why? Because everyone sits back to stop Favre. >>
Hmm you don't think it MIGHT be the fact that the offensive line in green bay blocks better than when Green played in seattle? A RBs success is not based solely on defenses sitting back and stopping the QB. >>
Wow, no sh!t Sherlock. But I guarantee that over the last 10 years (with the exception of last year), every team had a main game plan to stop Favre and not whatever RB they had going at the time. That means that in normal running situations, teams still had to focus on him and possibly drop back an extra defender to defend against the possible pass. That's why Barry Sanders could never get a first down on 3rd and 1-2 yards. They never had a reliable QB or FB and everybody jammed the box knowing who was going to get it. If there was a real threat there for a QB to pass, his conversion percentage would have been much higher. Getting 1-2 yards on first down with 7 guys in the box isn't too hard for a guy like him. Getting it with 10-11 guys in the box is much harder. It's not a difficult concept to understand...
<< <i>It's the reverse of Pitt and its situation. Their RB's in Green Bay look good because opponents gear up to stop Favre. Favre is a special QB. He has done a lot with a little IMO. They have had some good D's a while back, but they never had many of the offensive weapons many other teams did. I hate the Packers, but think Favre is one of the best the game has ever seen. Sure, he looked like crap last year and he may be done, but there are few QB's that will ever accomplish what this guy did in his career.
What is the reverse of the situation with Pitt? >>
Well lets figure it out. If I say that in Green Bay the RB's look better because of the QB and his talents, than the reverse would be that the QB looks better in Pittsburgh because of the RB's talents, wouldn't it? That wasn't so hard to figure out now, was it?