joe dirt Posted October 17, 2006 Share Posted October 17, 2006 Last week he puts Grossman as the number two QB. This week after Grossman's ONE bad game he drops him to the bottom of the sliding back list???? Not every QB can put up MVP type numbers every week. He also has Favre in the top ten then he is also in the sliding back list. Huh???? Maybe that one is a type-o but the Grossman ranking is just stupid in my opinion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randall Posted October 17, 2006 Share Posted October 17, 2006 You mean the writer with Favre in the top 10 and having him slding back too? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joe dirt Posted October 17, 2006 Author Share Posted October 17, 2006 Yes. Favre was on a bye but he still made it on the top ten and the sliding back. I hope this is a type-o. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randall Posted October 17, 2006 Share Posted October 17, 2006 Yes. Favre was on a bye but he still made it on the top ten and the sliding back. I hope this is a type-o. It probably is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mojo Rising Posted October 17, 2006 Share Posted October 17, 2006 I think Rivers should take that 10 spot (or higher)! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joe dirt Posted October 17, 2006 Author Share Posted October 17, 2006 yeah I think so to. It says the exact same thing in both but the Grossman thing I just don't understand at all. The Bears have been tearing it up on offense so far and tonight their Def. showed why they are tops in the game. Lets say mcNabb comes out of next weeks game with the same kinda numbers. He might drop two spots. Grossman has a bad game and he is now done? If you read what he says about McNabb he still makes no sense. McNabb "deserves to stay at the top spot because of what he has done in the first six weeks of the season as a whole." So why wouldn't that be the same for Grossman? His statement's are terrible. I have been a loyal member of this site for years and take peoples articles with a grain of salt but this is one of the worst things written I have ever seen on here. By the way I am a Grossman owner and have started him every week since week two. Ive gone 5-1 so far with him and Berrian. Good thing I had Tiki, Holt, Coles and Shockey go off for me this week. Even though the bears didn't show up I still won. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Avernus Posted October 17, 2006 Share Posted October 17, 2006 I think he bases them off the weekly matchups... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joe dirt Posted October 17, 2006 Author Share Posted October 17, 2006 If thats the case how can Bulger now be number two? He has a bye next week. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hutchprime Posted October 17, 2006 Share Posted October 17, 2006 Yeah, and Grossman plays San Fran AT Soldier Field in two weeks (also has a bye) I'll admit, that game last night scared the crap out of me, as a Grossman owner, but I'm trying not to panic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Waterboy Posted October 17, 2006 Share Posted October 17, 2006 I thought the explanation of the positional watches is that it is supposed to represent how a hypothetical draft would go, if it were being held today. Matchups would only be a factor then for the overall rest of season. Well, anyway, I'm starting to suspect the whole purpose of it is to stir the pot on the message board. It does seem to accomplish that week in and week out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jedi Posted October 17, 2006 Share Posted October 17, 2006 He was probably reminded that Grossman is way overrated. He's nothing more than a product of a good offensive line that broke down a bit last night. Rex's passes were terrible and often times nowhere near his target. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cre8tiff Posted October 17, 2006 Share Posted October 17, 2006 Even last week he said he was basically forced to include Grossman up there. He has been resisting placing Grossman on that list, based on past performance in previous seasons. Looks like as soon as he drank the kool-aid Grossman turned into a pumpkin. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rockerbraves Posted October 17, 2006 Share Posted October 17, 2006 Yeah, and Grossman plays San Fran AT Soldier Field in two weeks (also has a bye) I'll admit, that game last night scared the crap out of me, as a Grossman owner, but I'm trying not to panic. This will be a valuable learning experience for a young QB. If you read any of my post I'm a firm believer in that no player or team in the NFL is as good or bad as they played the week before. That's why I felt the Cards had a shot in this game. Prior to this week everyone was jumping aboard the Grossman/Bears offense bandwagon. That's normally a time to get concerned. . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randall Posted October 17, 2006 Share Posted October 17, 2006 I think he bases them off the weekly matchups... Yes he does. He resisted putting Favre there last year too and when he finally relented Brett had a bad game. Grossman is just like Rivers really. He'll grow. 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.