Jump to content

ndirish1978

Community Member
  • Posts

    8,134
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by ndirish1978

  1. Chan must be Paul Hackett. I have seen you pop up to defend Nate in EVERY thread where there's a negative comment on him. Seriously, I bet if I went to the Off Topic board and posted a negative comment about Nate in the midst of a thread about cookie recipes you'd pop in to defend him. Leave it alone, He's objectively bad not because of scores which you like to parrot, or your stubborn notion that it is impossible to run behind a subpar interior line. The Broncos turned out 1k runners season after season with nobodies for so long after TD left because they ran an effective run blocking scheme, not because their lineman were all all-pros or they had top flight rushers.The threat of the pass and an effective scheme can CREATE opportunities for running. When a line is stifled, you can create de facto rushes by running screens and bubble screens. Hackett does NONE of this. He calls an interior run and the RB moves forward for a yard or two before running into the arms of a wave of defenders who know what our 2 super secret 1st and 2nd down plays are: run inside off the RG or LG.

  2. The pure raw emotional reaction to Hackett is breathtaking to watch.

     

    I just find it hilarious that people fell hard for Gailey and his "amazing" offense, which put up almost identical stats to Hackett's. And that is with ONE QB: HIS chosen son Fitzpatrick who could NEVER be challenged as starter.

     

    Meanwhile Hackett has had a steady rotation of EJ, Tuel, and Lewis, and now Orton.

     

    But with Chan those exact same statistics were SO EXCITING!

     

    lol

     

    Solid straw man argument there. You argued against nothing he said.

  3. Manuel is staying in for the rest of the season barring injury. We're stuck with him and frankly I'd be more pissed if they benched him for Orton. He sucks. He will always suck. But in the infinitesimal chance that he might rise from the quagmire of sucking, it's not going to happen from the bench.

  4. Agreed. This was one of those that you just expect your QB to win for you, because in reality you need him to do so little. Fitzgerald throws INT on critical opening drive of 3 rd quarter in minus territory, down 10. You just need your QB to cash in a twenty yard drive to take a commanding lead, and he kills you. He makes all of one play the rest of the way, and it's too little too late. Your defense holds a team to 16 on the road, well your starter just HAS to be good enough to engineer a win there, EJ wasn't. Time to make a change?

     

    He didn't need to win it for us, he just needed to not lose. He overthrew wide open receivers and even though the OC decided to abandon the run and force us into offensive futility through the air, the defense kept us in the game until the last drive, when EJ DID lose the game for us in craptacular fashion.

  5. I'll post the same thing I just shouted, Its a mans game, in a mans world, don't take away the only contributions that allow woman to take part in the game.

     

    Its tradition to have cheerleaders at NFL home games, and not just NFL home games, almost all football home games.

     

     

    It should remain tradition IMO...

     

    This is a pretty offensive comment. The "only thing" women can do in the game of football is to dance around and cheer for the men? Though they play in a horribly chauvinistic league, the LFL actually features women who PLAY football. Your comment is so condescending I doubt I'd pay attention to anything else you post in this thread. It equates to "Awww, let the girlies do their dance, they just like the foosball."

×
×
  • Create New...