cre8tiff Posted September 26, 2007 Share Posted September 26, 2007 How much od Benson's lack of success is Grossman's ineptitude? I didn't look to see how the Bear's opposition was stacking the line, since Grossamn sucked. Perhaps a small amount of Benson's putridness could be attributed to the fact teams had absolutely ZERO fear of passing? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goopster24 Posted September 26, 2007 Share Posted September 26, 2007 How much od Benson's lack of success is Grossman's ineptitude? I didn't look to see how the Bear's opposition was stacking the line, since Grossamn sucked. Perhaps a small amount of Benson's putridness could be attributed to the fact teams had absolutely ZERO fear of passing? The offensive line wasn't playing great in the first two games. Sunday they looked decent. I think Benson can come around if Griese can stay consistent and move the chains when needed. This team is still going to want to run the ball first and often. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Missoula Griz Posted September 26, 2007 Share Posted September 26, 2007 In my local I will be starting both Shaun McDonald AND Roy Williams In C&I I will be starting Roy Williams In FOFF I may start Shaun McDonald ...still deciding In Hannibals it is unlikely that I will start Shaun McDonald with my other options ... but he is under mild consideration In CORE I wish had Shaun McDonald to start What ever happened to just playing in one league? It seems strange to watch games with so many players involved. You must go crazy at times cheering for or against one of your own players depending on the circumstances. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grits and Shins Posted September 26, 2007 Share Posted September 26, 2007 What ever happened to just playing in one league? It seems strange to watch games with so many players involved. You must go crazy at times cheering for or against one of your own players depending on the circumstances. I'm in fewer leagues now than before. I have learned NOT to watch my fantasy games on Sunday, instead I watch football. I never check my opponent's line ups so I do not know who is going against me. Basically I set my line ups and forget them. In addition, whiile I want to win all my games there are some of my leagues I prefer to win in over others. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Missoula Griz Posted September 26, 2007 Share Posted September 26, 2007 I'm in fewer leagues now than before. I have learned NOT to watch my fantasy games on Sunday, instead I watch football. I never check my opponent's line ups so I do not know who is going against me. Basically I set my line ups and forget them. In addition, whiile I want to win all my games there are some of my leagues I prefer to win in over others. I was in two leagues years back. I kinda did the same thing as you do. It ruined football if I was focusing only on players. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Swerski Posted September 26, 2007 Share Posted September 26, 2007 I was in two leagues years back. I kinda did the same thing as you do. It ruined football if I was focusing only on players. I was in two leagues for much of the past nine years that I've been playing FF, and even three once. I just can't do it anymore, for the same reasons that you outlined. That and the fact that my spare time is devoted to other things now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wildcat2334 Posted September 26, 2007 Share Posted September 26, 2007 I was in two leagues for much of the past nine years that I've been playing FF, and even three once. I just can't do it anymore, for the same reasons that you outlined. That and the fact that my spare time is devoted to other things now. like posting on FF message boards? not sure how time consuming 2 FF leagues would be....... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheShiznit Posted September 26, 2007 Share Posted September 26, 2007 1993 Green Bay Packers 16 16 318 522 60.9 3303 6.3 19 24 30 199 72.2 58 216 3.7 1 14 6 1992 Green Bay Packers 15 13 302 471 64.1 3227 6.9 18 13 34 208 85.3 47 198 4.2 1 12 4 Above are Brett Favre's first two years as a starter. Aside from one game he played the two full years. You can look at the numbers and figure them out. 1992...18 TD's and 13INT's 12 fumbles 4 lost 1993...19 TD's and 24INT's 14 fumbles 6 lost. Chicago has shown patience my a$$. If GreenBay were to show as much patience with Favre as we have with any of our QB's.....they would have let go a hall of famer. PERSPECTIVE PEOPLE...Rex was 18-8 as a starter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wildcat2334 Posted September 26, 2007 Share Posted September 26, 2007 I'm in fewer leagues now than before. I have learned NOT to watch my fantasy games on Sunday, instead I watch football. I never check my opponent's line ups so I do not know who is going against me. Basically I set my line ups and forget them. In addition, whiile I want to win all my games there are some of my leagues I prefer to win in over others. exact opposite for me- I would rather play in 2 good leagues and watch my lineups on Sundays- that is the best part, rather than have half the league on all my rosters so it is so diluted I don't even pay attention. oh and this Rex move is LONG overdue- I think Griese will jumpstart the O and move the ball pretty well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NAUgrad Posted September 26, 2007 Share Posted September 26, 2007 I'm sorry, but it's painfully obvious that Grossman is no Favre. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Swerski Posted September 26, 2007 Share Posted September 26, 2007 like posting on FF message boards? not sure how time consuming 2 FF leagues would be....... I post to the boards regardless. You're correct that being in 2 FF leagues isn't the most time-consuming thing in the world, but it gets to the point where it's just another thing to deal with. I don't feel like scheduling time for multiple drafts and managing multiple teams throughout the week. And rooting for and against the same players/teams at the same time makes watching the games a little less enjoyable. JMO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Swerski Posted September 26, 2007 Share Posted September 26, 2007 (edited) 1993 Green Bay Packers 16 16 318 522 60.9 3303 6.3 19 24 30 199 72.2 58 216 3.7 1 14 61992 Green Bay Packers 15 13 302 471 64.1 3227 6.9 18 13 34 208 85.3 47 198 4.2 1 12 4 Above are Brett Favre's first two years as a starter. Aside from one game he played the two full years. You can look at the numbers and figure them out. 1992...18 TD's and 13INT's 12 fumbles 4 lost 1993...19 TD's and 24INT's 14 fumbles 6 lost. Chicago has shown patience my a$$. If GreenBay were to show as much patience with Favre as we have with any of our QB's.....they would have let go a hall of famer. PERSPECTIVE PEOPLE...Rex was 18-8 as a starter. Anybody who watched Favre back in the early '90s saw that he had unparalleled skills and comparing him to Rex is silly, to put it nicely. Oh, and he could actually complete 60% of his passes and didn't fire off strings of sub-40 QB ratings for weeks on end. And he could actually stay healthy for an entire season. You also conveniently forgot to mention that Green Bay's running games in '92 and '93 were bad. Neither of those teams had a 500-yd rusher, much less a 1,000-yd rusher. Favre had A LOT more pressure on him early on (he had to learn the WCO, Rex didn't) than Rex did with Jones/Benson carrying the offense. And your "it's only his second full year as a starter" argument is weak. He's been taking snaps in a Bears uniform since 2003. How freaking long does it take to learn how to read a defense? Rex has had more than enough opportunities to succeed in a "run-first, you don't need to do too much" system with a stud defense keeping him in the game. And he's failed miserably. It's possible (though unlikely) that he'll be a solid NFL QB one day, but it's not going to happen in Chicago. Edited September 26, 2007 by Bill Swerski Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
budlitebrad Posted September 26, 2007 Share Posted September 26, 2007 Good thing Grossman held off on signing a contract extension. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingfish247 Posted September 26, 2007 Share Posted September 26, 2007 (edited) How freaking long does it take to learn how to read a defense? Rex has had more than enough opportunities to succeed in a "run-first, you don't need to do too much" system with a stud defense keeping him in the game. And he's failed miserably. This couldn't be anymore obvious. Again... since week 6 last year, including the playoffs, Rex is dead last in passer rating/turnovers/completion percentage. That's even qualified because it's amongst all QBs with a minimum of 100 attempts in that timeframe. I'm not sure where Favre stood in those categories amongst his contemporaries after about 30 games but I'd be willing to bet it was better than dead LAST. It also illustrates exactly how good the defense and special teams is... put Rex on any other team since week 6 of last year and I'll show you a team that struggles to win 6-7 games in that timespan. Nevermind winning a conference and making it to the Super Bowl. Edited September 26, 2007 by kingfish247 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Swerski Posted September 26, 2007 Share Posted September 26, 2007 I'm not sure where Favre stood in those categories amongst his contemporaries after about 30 games but I'd be willing to bet it was better than dead LAST. The one thing that really sticks out about Favre in those early years in GB is that he actually lead his team to comebacks when they were down late in the game. Back then, even when Brett was throwing stupid picks while trying to make plays, it was obvious that he was a winner who could deal with the pressure and come up with the big play when they needed it. Grossman is the exact opposite: He only played well last year when the Bears had an early lead. Look at the AZ game, the MIA game, and the second GB game: when the Bears went down early, Rex went into panic mode a turned the ball over 3+ times. Early in the fourth quarter of the Super Bowl, when they were only down by five and had plenty of time to get into the endzone, Rex threw not one, but TWO game-killing picks. Rex could probably improve his play in a better offensive system and could probably get better at reading defenses, but that's not going to matter much because he consistently turns into a grease fire when he's under pressure to make a play. Grossman's lack of confidence and inability to stay calm in pressure situations is not going to be easily-fixed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheShiznit Posted September 26, 2007 Share Posted September 26, 2007 I'm sorry, but it's painfully obvious that Grossman is no Favre. Believe me, even if he were....which he never will be....Chicago fans and media will never know. They are too busy ripping people down versus building them up. That is our history. Believe me, if Favre was in Chicago those first two years....he would have been toast....furture hall of famer good bye. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheShiznit Posted September 26, 2007 Share Posted September 26, 2007 The one thing that really sticks out about Favre in those early years in GB is that he actually lead his team to comebacks when they were down late in the game. Back then, even when Brett was throwing stupid picks while trying to make plays, it was obvious that he was a winner who could deal with the pressure and come up with the big play when they needed it. Grossman is the exact opposite: He only played well last year when the Bears had an early lead. Look at the AZ game, the MIA game, and the second GB game: when the Bears went down early, Rex went into panic mode a turned the ball over 3+ times. Early in the fourth quarter of the Super Bowl, when they were only down by five and had plenty of time to get into the endzone, Rex threw not one, but TWO game-killing picks. Rex could probably improve his play in a better offensive system and could probably get better at reading defenses, but that's not going to matter much because he consistently turns into a grease fire when he's under pressure to make a play. Grossman's lack of confidence and inability to stay calm in pressure situations is not going to be easily-fixed. It is only obvious know because you know what already came to pass. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Swerski Posted September 26, 2007 Share Posted September 26, 2007 Believe me, even if he were....which he never will be....Chicago fans and media will never know. They are too busy ripping people down versus building them up. That is our history. Believe me, if Favre was in Chicago those first two years....he would have been toast....furture hall of famer good bye. I think that you're confusing Chicago with New York or Philly. While I agree that Chicago's fans and media can be rough, it's not even close to what people Bledsoe, McNabb, and Phil Simms had to go through in their respective markets. If Rex can't handle Chicago's relatively docile media and fans, he won't make it anywhere as a starter in the NFL. And as for Favre, he wouldn't have spent most of his first three seasons with the Bears on IR and I'm pretty sure that he wouldn't have shat his pants every time that he was under pressure to get his offense into the endzone. The latter point is what really killed Rex. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pope Flick Posted September 26, 2007 Share Posted September 26, 2007 From when he started until today, Brett Favre has clearly been a player who would have to be dragged off the field in a stretcher if his team was losing. Grossman has exactly 0% of that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingfish247 Posted September 26, 2007 Share Posted September 26, 2007 (edited) It is only obvious know because you know what already came to pass. Sounds like a line from the Matrix. Edited September 26, 2007 by kingfish247 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.