Rustlestiltskin Posted October 20, 2008 Author Report Share Posted October 20, 2008 lets go steeeeeeeeelers steeler fans represent!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Main3s Posted October 20, 2008 Report Share Posted October 20, 2008 http://i102.photobucket.com/albums/m96/firegirl199/media1-1.gif Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Karacho1647545492 Posted October 21, 2008 Report Share Posted October 21, 2008 And since you're a Pats fan, look up which QB has the most come-from-behind 4th quarter wins over the last five or so years. Hint: it's not your boy Brady Its hard to have a come from behind victory when you're winning in the 4th quarter. You want to start comparing Delhomme to Brady? ok lets go. Delhomme's been in the league since 99, Brady since 00. In that time, Delhomme has posted 2 seasons above a 100 QB rating, but he played 4 games the first time, and 3 games the 2nd, whereas Brady's last year was his only where he averaged above 100, but he played all 16 games. He's only had 3 complete seasons (I don't count 06, Weinke played 3 games). Brady has 6 complete seasons, and one with 15 games. Delhomme career passer rating: 85.1 (good, not good enough for an 03 Super Bowl) Brady passer rating: 92.9 TD/Int Delhomme: 107/69 Brady: 197/86 Yds Delhomme: 16122 Brady: 26,446 I don't care if Brady's had more games to do it in, avoiding injury is a skill too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2 Sweet Posted October 21, 2008 Report Share Posted October 21, 2008 Dude, you can compare all the stats you want, I don't care. You're comparing apples to oranges here anyway, but that's a moot point. You called out Delhomme and I just wanted to know what you were basing your opinion off of Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Main3s Posted October 21, 2008 Report Share Posted October 21, 2008 Its hard to have a come from behind victory when you're winning in the 4th quarter. You want to start comparing Delhomme to Brady? ok lets go. Delhomme's been in the league since 99, Brady since 00. In that time, Delhomme has posted 2 seasons above a 100 QB rating, but he played 4 games the first time, and 3 games the 2nd, whereas Brady's last year was his only where he averaged above 100, but he played all 16 games. He's only had 3 complete seasons (I don't count 06, Weinke played 3 games). Brady has 6 complete seasons, and one with 15 games. Delhomme career passer rating: 85.1 (good, not good enough for an 03 Super Bowl) Brady passer rating: 92.9 TD/Int Delhomme: 107/69 Brady: 197/86 Yds Delhomme: 16122 Brady: 26,446 I don't care if Brady's had more games to do it in, avoiding injury is a skill too. It doesn't hurt the old stats when you coach keeps you in the games while you run up the scores either... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cptn janks Posted October 21, 2008 Report Share Posted October 21, 2008 http://www.partiers.com/gobrowns/steelerssuck_comsteelersfans.jpg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cptn janks Posted October 21, 2008 Report Share Posted October 21, 2008 however, one thing you gotta give em... they got the BIGGEST female fanbase http://blog.dairytwist.org/images/blog/SteelersFans.jpg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest 614Streets Posted October 21, 2008 Report Share Posted October 21, 2008 http://www.partiers.com/gobrowns/steelerssuck_comsteelersfans.jpg Thats funny. God dam eagles. Fucking Mcnabb. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Karacho1647545492 Posted October 21, 2008 Report Share Posted October 21, 2008 It doesn't hurt the old stats when you coach keeps you in the games while you run up the scores either... They do it in the NCAA. Just because there's no Heisman in pro football means they shouldn't do the same? Its up to other coaches to do what they want, but IMO 60 minutes is 60 minutes and both teams better be ready to play 100% of them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Main3s Posted October 21, 2008 Report Share Posted October 21, 2008 They do it in the NCAA. Just because there's no Heisman in pro football means they shouldn't do the same? Its up to other coaches to do what they want, but IMO 60 minutes is 60 minutes and both teams better be ready to play 100% of them. I'll agree with that, 60 minutes is 60 minutes. Both teams should come to play, and I don't think it's the winning coaches job to not emberass the other team. But it is a bit misleading when you go off of stats that he racked up against lesser teams while the game was already won in the first half. And this year with Brady being hurt I bet they wish they could have gone back and gave their back up a few reps durring some of those blow outs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Main3s Posted October 21, 2008 Report Share Posted October 21, 2008 http://www.partiers.com/gobrowns/steelerssuck_comsteelersfans.jpg I didn't cath what team you're rooting for? Or do you just go against the good ones? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Karacho1647545492 Posted October 21, 2008 Report Share Posted October 21, 2008 And this year with Brady being hurt I bet they wish they could have gone back and gave their back up a few reps durring some of those blow outs. Disagree. People have been saying a lot of things regarding his injury. Stupid stuff like "oh look, it was the first time in years Brady had been taken off the injury report" and superstitious claims like that. I've played sports before (yea, stupid fatty caxide played sports!) and I totally get the superstition thing, I had my own ritual when I played goalie. Still, you can't honestly say that Brady got hurt for any other reason than Pollard coming flying down on his knee. Not a dirty hit, not a malicious hit, in no way related to anything other than the shitty circumstances of the hit, the play, and the knee. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Main3s Posted October 21, 2008 Report Share Posted October 21, 2008 Disagree. People have been saying a lot of things regarding his injury. Stupid stuff like "oh look, it was the first time in years Brady had been taken off the injury report" and superstitious claims like that. I've played sports before (yea, stupid fatty caxide played sports!) and I totally get the superstition thing, I had my own ritual when I played goalie. Still, you can't honestly say that Brady got hurt for any other reason than Pollard coming flying down on his knee. Not a dirty hit, not a malicious hit, in no way related to anything other than the shitty circumstances of the hit, the play, and the knee. No I don't think it was a dirty hit at all. And it really sucks for the Pats (they're still a good team). I'm just saying instead of staying in late in the 4th qtr a few games last year running up the score and padding your stats. Maybe they could have put Cassel in and got him some game practice. I just think if the games in the bag why risk an unnecessary injury to your starting QB and why not give the back up some playing time. I don’t know if that’s superstition or just a bad judgment call. They got lucky that nothing happened last year, but think about the learning curve that wouldn’t be as big this year for Matt Cassel if he had a few games under his belt. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Karacho1647545492 Posted October 21, 2008 Report Share Posted October 21, 2008 Maybe they could have put Cassel in and got him some game practice. I just think if the games in the bag why risk an unnecessary injury to your starting QB and why not give the back up some playing time. I don’t know if that’s superstition or just a bad judgment call. They got lucky that nothing happened last year, but think about the learning curve that wouldn’t be as big this year for Matt Cassel if he had a few games under his belt. I think you're right to some extent. I would've liked to have seen more minutes under Cassel's belt by the beginning of this year, but at the same time I don't think the offensive woes were necessarily his fault this year. I think he inherited a system designed for one of the greatest QBs to ever play the game, and its understandable why he struggled at the beginning of this year. The Brady offense called for a lot of poise in the pocket and the willingness to throw the ball. Cassel was unable to do this with the Brady offense so they had to rely on the short plays that were still designed for Brady, but at least got the ball out of his hands faster. As we saw last night, this offense is finally clicking. I think it just too this long to develop an offense around Cassel in a way that utilizes the normal players; hell, Moss caught 2 TDs, his first this season. Cassel had a great time rolling out right and passing to Moss upfield or Faulk in the flat. Brady is so immobile he'd never have been able to make that kind of play work. I think we're about to start seeing a revitalized Pats offense, even if the D will suffer sans-Harrison. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.