jbooma Posted August 27, 2003 Share Posted August 27, 2003 Originally posted by Kornheiser *lol* cute you have a cheerleader. But Coles/Gardner were not a tandem. They were allowed to lead their teams seperately, while Harrison/Wayne had to divide the one teams catches. My 143/2 still stands. Korn has a point. We can't say Coles and Gardner are one of the best tandoms since they haven't played together yet. After this year then we can they are. At this point we can say they have the potential of becoming one of the best, but not yet since they haven't proven it together. As for us being one of the best 1-3 teams, I serioulsly doubt it. Jacobs looks and smells great, but he hasn't played in the regular season yet. Give him a chance before you rank him so when he reads this his head doesn't explode :cool: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom [Giants fan] Posted August 27, 2003 Share Posted August 27, 2003 I was going through a lot of posts and finally came to a mention of the Giants. I was wondering if you guys were going to leave Toomer/Hilliard out of this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trevor Posted August 27, 2003 Share Posted August 27, 2003 Originally posted by Tom [Giants fan] I was going through a lot of posts and finally came to a mention of the Giants. I was wondering if you guys were going to leave Toomer/Hilliard out of this. I haven't posted in this thread but until Hilliard stays healthy and puts up some numbers I don't think that tandem should be included. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henry Posted August 28, 2003 Share Posted August 28, 2003 Korn, that post was all over the place. I'll see what I can do here: Originally posted by Kornheiser *lol* cute you have a cheerleader. But Coles/Gardner were not a tandem. They were allowed to lead their teams seperately, while Harrison/Wayne had to divide the one teams catches. My 143/2 still stands. No it doesn't. It only stands if you want to compare Harrison to Gardner straight up. Harrison is the #1 on his team. Coles is the #1 on ours. Did Harrison double Coles' production? If not, it's a moot point. We agree 71 catches is not what it used to be. And RBs & TE catch that much now days. And that some WR catch twice that. If you want to quibble over "reserves" & "starters", go start another thread.. I'm sorry if my 'quibbling' bothers you. My policy is that if someone wants to criticize a team or a player, he'd better know what he's talking about. The best way to gauge whether or not said critic knows his stuff is through the accuracy of his statements. Your statements thus far have been, to say the least, less than accurate. 'Some' receivers do NOT catch 142 balls a season. 100-catch receivers do NOT miss the pro-bowl 'all the time.' When you constantly exagerate to make the facts fit your opinion, I'm going to call you on it. And I'm going to rightfully question that opinion. In anycase my point stands without it. 71woopie Did we agree that 1006 yards is worthy of a sarcastic whoopie? What about 8 TDs? What about a 72% first down percentage? Forget one stat. I agree, that's too vague. Let's look at the whole picture here. On the drops, surely you saw the drop in the 2nd preseason. It was one of 'those drops'. We could discuss the season as it goes by, and exchange opinions then with it fresh in our minds. Ok. I don't really care about pre-season one bit. One drop in one preseason game? Sorry, I can't bring myself to care about it. Point out the multiple 'those drops' you remember from last season and that's something we can talk about. Again I enjoy your comments. Discussion should be a calaboration not a contest. But if you're going to be someone else's champion. I'll give you my customary 3'replies-n-a'goodbye. Some people want to make this about Gardner (it's not, check the thread title). If they feel it has already been done?? why piss on our parade, go to another thread. I haven't made this about Gardner. I thought we were talking about tandems. I even attempted to stress that very fact in my last post, hence the all caps. If you simply want to say 'we don't know about our tandem because they were both #1s last season' that's fine. Let's end it there then. That being said, I'm not your ignoring facts, anymore than your ignoring mine. It's a discussion of facts. If that makes you uncomfortable, then maybe we should end this discussion with civility. In that way, I'll decide what I'll do, but I will be taking my cue from you. The choice is yours. You said stats don't tell the tale. You said we shouldn't base our opinions of Gardner on his stats. I was going there because of you, Korn. I'll talk stats. I'll talk opinions. I'll talk both. I've done as much in this thread. I'm not sure how you got the feeling I'm somehow uncomfortable about any of this. All I'm doing is following YOUR cues here ... maybe you've had enough beer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kornheiser Posted August 28, 2003 Share Posted August 28, 2003 Originally posted by DougWilliams kornheiser said, <<the opponent is running out the clock, a lot of passing stats accumulate (as well as a lot of easy non-drops, ummagumma).>> kornheiser, but unless we're greater than 7 pointer per 2 minutes behind, I would think that every catch counts. In fact, those are pressure catches too. Also, if we have the ball, they are not running the clock out... It's well known, defenses open up over middle (where people catch balls, go down & the clock keeps running) and increase their efforts to guard against the outside & long ball. Originally posted by Jbooma Korn has a point. We can't say Coles and Gardner are one of the best tandoms since they haven't played together yet. After this year then we can they are. At this point we can say they have the potential of becoming one of the best, but not yet since they haven't proven it together. Jbooma: Yes, people simply can't compare a 2nd leading reciever on one team (Waynes) to the leading reciever on another (Coles/Jets or Gardner/'Skins). Even worse Wayne was THIRD in recieving on his team not even 2nd. Sheeez, talking about fudging the stats. I question stats because people love to fudge them to their point. It's a valid enough point that if people ignore it, I don't see a point in continuing. Tom GF: I look forward to you tomarrow. A very interesting point. NOTE TO ALL: my beer drinking analogy is a gentle reminder to keep it mello, keep it friendly. Like a "talk with friends over beers". If "the talk over beers" begins to turn to "swipes with pool sticks", I'm going to cut you off & end the discussion. No actual beer is being consumed. So if I "crack a beer" I'm giving you a hint. Henry: perhaps Saturday when you've "had a beer" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henry Posted August 28, 2003 Share Posted August 28, 2003 Don't get me wrong, Korny. I like the beer thing you've got going. I hope you don't think I've brought my cue stick to bear. I save that for Dallas fans. Even worse Wayne was THIRD in recieving on his team not even 2nd. Sheeez, talking about fudging the stats. I question stats because people love to fudge them to their point. Wayne was the #2 WR on the team. That is what I stated. That is a fact. That Ed James, a RB, was the second leading receiver on the Colts says even more about the lack of a quality WR TANDEM on that team. Again, I think our duo hold up just fine against theirs, which was what we are talking about, right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Funbuncher Posted August 28, 2003 Share Posted August 28, 2003 Bottom line is that after this year, our WRs corps will be considered in the top 3 or 4 in the NFL. IMO, Coles will be over 1300 yards and Gardner, who will develop this year into every bit the WR Keyshawn is, will get close to 1200. The other 1500 yards that Ramsey throws for will be divided up between the rest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kornheiser Posted September 3, 2003 Share Posted September 3, 2003 Originally posted by Tom [Giants fan] I was going through a lot of posts and finally came to a mention of the Giants. I was wondering if you guys were going to leave Toomer/Hilliard out of this. An interesting point as Toomer (1rst), Shockney (2nd), and ,if not for 2 catches, Barber(3rd) the Giants WOULD have had THREE players who reached thee heralded -71 receptions barrior-. And that is with the Giants losing Hilliard for half the season. And everybody is coming back, no one is new. Typically this is where others drift from stats to explanations. Some have said I've said stats can be wrong. I have not. I have said stats are INCOMPLETE, people are wrong & don't look at everything. In the stock market where people can't afford sentiment or ego, this is more easily admitted. But I think the Giants are quietly the best recieving team in the NFC-east. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skins24 Posted September 3, 2003 Share Posted September 3, 2003 Quietly? They had 4103 yards through the air last year. Philly was next with 3606. They are (were) the best recieving team. Especially if you include Shockey. Whether they have the best wide recievers or not, that remains to be seen. But of course I like Washington's corp better Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henry Posted September 3, 2003 Share Posted September 3, 2003 Are we still talking about this? Ok. As far as WR tandems go, Shockey and Barber don't matter, as neither one is a WR. However, I readily concede that Shockey is far better than any TE we have and Barber is better out of the backfield than any RB we have. Based solely on receptions, the Giants, certainly make a strong case for tops in the division. *cracking a beer* However, setting aside the fact that the above point is completely moot, I'd like to follow Kornheiser's line of thinking and delve into other stats, such as receiving yards and TDs. Only one player on the Giant roster topped 1000 receiving yards last season. Only one topped 3 receiving TDs. Two players currently on the Redskins roster amassed at least 1000 receiving yards and 5 TDs. And I think the Redskins could very well have the top WR tandem in the NFC East, if not overall receiving team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kornheiser Posted September 5, 2003 Share Posted September 5, 2003 Originally posted by Skins24 Quietly? They had 4103 yards through the air last year. Philly was next with 3606. They are (were) the best recieving team. Especially if you include Shockey. Whether they have the best wide recievers or not, that remains to be seen. But of course I like Washington's corp better You are right. I have understated my point. But in these parts, I have found if you don't "tow the party line" you can get in the 'proverbial doghouse' quick. So forgive me if I speak as if I'm on Solviet radio. I have had people... ...post false claims/stats/sites. Delete it after their friends post numerous knocks & snickers. ...question my fan loyalty with Mccarthyism zeal. ...chop sentences in half. Re-explain half of it to others. Without the parts that make re-explaining impossible. ...egg on pawns with flattery to do their dirty work while they snicker in the background. " it is dangerous to be right, when the governing body is wrong" - Voltaire Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost of Posted September 5, 2003 Share Posted September 5, 2003 If this were truly McCarthyism, you really would be a Cowboys fan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.