myhousekey Posted December 26, 2004 Share Posted December 26, 2004 the Saints were terrible once December rolled around??? 3-1 this year in December with a chance next week to make the playoffs with a win at Carolina. Wow, who would have thought?!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phenom Posted December 26, 2004 Share Posted December 26, 2004 Now does everyone think that Vick doesn't have an effect on the entire Falcons team. That defense didn't show up today when they needed them most.......... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skrappy1 Posted December 26, 2004 Share Posted December 26, 2004 Now does everyone think that Vick doesn't have an effect on the entire Falcons team. That defense didn't show up today when they needed them most.......... 631978[/snapback] That seriously makes no sense. Atlanta's defense still had 4 Sacks and 2 Interceptions today. Plus 9 of the Saints 26 points came off a Safety and a Kick Return on special teams. You can blame the Atlanta offense without Vick, but you can't credibly place blame on Atlanta's defense or claim that Vick somehow has an effect on them (unless by effect you mean by keeping them off the field a tad bit more than Schaub). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phenom Posted December 26, 2004 Share Posted December 26, 2004 That seriously makes no sense. Atlanta's defense still had 4 Sacks and 2 Interceptions today. Plus 9 of the Saints 26 points came off a Safety and a Kick Return on special teams. You can blame the Atlanta offense without Vick, but you can't credibly place blame on Atlanta's defense or claim that Vick somehow has an effect on them (unless by effect you mean by keeping them off the field a tad bit more than Schaub). 631984[/snapback] Aaron Brooks threw for 227 yards, produced 2 TD's Deuce McAllister had 128 yards rushing Saints had 369 yards of offense. The Saints kept the ball for 33 minutes and that's with that kickoff return and those turnovers so the time of possession difference could have been much worse. And don't forget the most important fact, this is the Saints we are talking about.......... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grits and Shins Posted December 26, 2004 Share Posted December 26, 2004 Vick wasn't the only player inactive today ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phenom Posted December 26, 2004 Share Posted December 26, 2004 Vick wasn't the only player inactive today ... 632002[/snapback] You play with what you have. There won't be any excuses made for Vick if a player is inactive when he plays............. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skrappy1 Posted December 26, 2004 Share Posted December 26, 2004 (edited) Aaron Brooks threw for 227 yards, produced 2 TD's 632001[/snapback] Aaron Brooks has started 67 games in his career prior to today. He has in those 67 starts he has accounted for 16,971 yards. That averages out to 252+ yards of offense a game. His 227 yards today would thus be below his average game for his career. Deuce McAllister had 128 yards rushing Deuce McAllister has started 43 games over the last 3 seasons prior to today. In those 43 games he has accounted for 4917 total yards. That averages out to 114+ yards of offense a game. So his game was right around an average game for his career (14 yards over if you're counting)...maybe you have convienently forgotten that he had 9 straight 100 yard rushing games just last season. And don't forget the most important fact, this is the Saints we are talking about.......... So now what was you're point again? Not many have ever doubted that the Saints were talented...they're just extremely erratic and poorly coached. They didn't really do anything special today, beating an Atlanta team that didn't have much to play for and sat a bunch of players. Why do you feel the need to incessantly argue that Vick is so great at this moment in time? Are you related to him? Do you have a man-crush on him? It simply isn't so. He does NOT play defense, thus he can't have much of an effect on them. Get over the hype already...Vick doesn't suck but he is NOT the best player in the NFL right now, not even in the top 5. Talent wise maybe, but not performance wise. Accept it already and stop making a fool of yourself. Edited December 26, 2004 by Skrappy1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phenom Posted December 26, 2004 Share Posted December 26, 2004 Aaron Brooks has started 67 games in his career prior to today. He has in those 67 starts he has accounted for 16,971 yards. That averages out to 252+ yards of offense a game. His 227 yards today would thus be below his average game for his career. Deuce McAllister has started 43 games over the last 3 seasons prior to today. In those 43 games he has accounted for 4917 total yards. That averages out to 114+ yards of offense a game. So his game was right around an average game for his career (14 yards over if you're counting)...maybe you have convienently forgotten that he had 9 straight 100 yard rushing games just last season. So now what was you're point again? Not many have ever doubted that the Saints were talented...they're just extremely erratic and poorly coached. They didn't really do anything special today, beating an Atlanta team that didn't have much to play for and sat a bunch of players. Why do you feel the need to incessantly argue that Vick is so great at this moment in time? Are you related to him? Do you have a man-crush on him? It simply isn't so. He does NOT play defense, thus he can't have much of an effect on them. Get over the hype already...Vick doesn't suck but he is NOT the best player in the NFL right now, not even in the top 5. Talent wise maybe, but not performance wise. Accept it already and stop making a fool of yourself. 632026[/snapback] The gist that I get from your entire message is that the Saints skill players are going to get their numbers and the Falcons defense have no effect on them. You just plug in their career numbers and thats what they should get. Well if a defense is supposedly carrying a team then why shouldn't they be able to contain Brooks and McAllister. Peyton Manning faced the Ravens last week why didn't he get his numbers? You just plug in the numbers right? As far as today's game Aaron Brooks has only accounted for 2 or more TD's 5 times this year so he performed over his average this year. Let's talk present tense okay. Deuce McAllister definitely a top RB but not this year. He had 806 yards on 212 carries for a 3.8 ypc avg. He hadn't topped 100 yards in 3 weeks; in fact this was his season high in yards 128 and 4.4 ypc avg. The Saints average time of possession for the year? 27:35 which is the 28th worst in the NFL. Today they had the ball over 33 minutes a significant difference. As far as Vick I defend him because everyone else feels the need to talk bad about him because the NFL promotes him and crappy shoes from spammers puts out his commercials. You just can't argue with Vicks success when he plays AND the teams losing record when he doesn't play.............. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Swerski Posted December 26, 2004 Share Posted December 26, 2004 Missing Vick obviously hurt the Falcons, but missing Crumpler (their leading receiver?) also hurt. Plus, how well does Schuab (a rookie) know that offense? While Vick has been a big part of Atlanta's success this year, their defense and the weak NFC have been just as much a factor. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phenom Posted December 26, 2004 Share Posted December 26, 2004 Missing Vick obviously hurt the Falcons, but missing Crumpler (their leading receiver?) also hurt. Plus, how well does Schuab (a rookie) know that offense? While Vick has been a big part of Atlanta's success this year, their defense and the weak NFC have been just as much a factor. 632041[/snapback] You mean even though they beat San Diego and Denver this year?........... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Swerski Posted December 26, 2004 Share Posted December 26, 2004 You mean even though they beat San Diego and Denver this year?........... 632057[/snapback] San Diego is good, but Denver is not a playoff-caliber team. Remember how Vick did against Tampa Bay? Vick's a good QB, but is NOT passing the ball well right now. I'm assuming that's because he's still learning the WCO. But, at this point, I'd much rather have someone another "overrated" player like McNabb or Delhomme leading my team in the playoffs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skrappy1 Posted December 26, 2004 Share Posted December 26, 2004 The gist that I get from your entire message is that the Saints skill players are going to get their numbers and the Falcons defense have no effect on them. You just plug in their career numbers and thats what they should get. Well if a defense is supposedly carrying a team then why shouldn't they be able to contain Brooks and McAllister. Peyton Manning faced the Ravens last week why didn't he get his numbers? You just plug in the numbers right?As far as today's game Aaron Brooks has only accounted for 2 or more TD's 5 times this year so he performed over his average this year. Let's talk present tense okay. Deuce McAllister definitely a top RB but not this year. He had 806 yards on 212 carries for a 3.8 ypc avg. He hadn't topped 100 yards in 3 weeks; in fact this was his season high in yards 128 and 4.4 ypc avg. 632040[/snapback] Yes, of course that's what I'm saying. My real point of course is, as I think you know, that both of their numbers today were not really anything that special. You act as if Brooks put up 400 yards and 4 TDs or Deuce ran for 200 yards. In reality, Brooks was typical Brooks...less than 250 total yards, 2 TDs but with 2 INTs as well. Deuce rushed for his season high, but he also had 29 carries, which is more than he has had in all but 1 game this season. Let's not forget that he missed several games this year and was clearly less than 100% for a good portion of the season. He is absolutely a very capable, dangerous RB....it's not like the the Falcon's D imploded because he rushed for over 100 yards today, not by a longshot. I also think that mindframes of the respective teams has to come into play here. The Saints are fighting for a possible playoff berth, the Falcons on the other hand already have their division wrapped up, and thus don't have much to play for...if they did I'm pretty sure we would have seen Vick out there playing today instead of Schaub. And if you want to talk present tense numbers, then check these: In 14 games this season, Vick has accounted for 16 total TDs (13 Passing/3 Rushing) and 19 total Turnovers (12 Interceptions and 7 Lost Fumbles). He's also taken 44 Sacks. Now numbers rarely lie, so explain how those numbers translate into Vick somehow being single handedly responsible for the Falcon's record and success this season? The fact of the matter is, that despite all those turnovers by Vick, the Atlanta defense still has managed a +3 in the takeaway/giveaway department. If Vick has helped the defense in that venture, then he must also be playing defense in cognito, and forcing a lot of turnovers, because that fact is at least as responsible for the Falcon's success as Vick. As far as Vick I defend him because everyone else feels the need to talk bad about him because the NFL promotes him and crappy shoes from spammers puts out his commercials. Fair enough, but just because some people will mindlessly argue that he sucks or even that he has isn't very talented (yes, people were actually arguing that on these boards this week), that doesn't mean that you should mindlessly argue that he is Superman who has single handedly taken the Falcons on his back and carried them through the course of the season just in order to offset them. Isn't the truth of the matter actually somewhere in between? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phenom Posted December 26, 2004 Share Posted December 26, 2004 Fair enough, but just because some people will mindlessly argue that he sucks or even that he has isn't very talented (yes, people were actually arguing that on these boards this week), that doesn't mean that you should mindlessly argue that he is Superman who has single handedly taken the Falcons on his back and carried them through the course of the season just in order to offset them. Isn't the truth of the matter actually somewhere in between? 632066[/snapback] I can concede that.............. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skrappy1 Posted December 26, 2004 Share Posted December 26, 2004 I can concede that.............. 632106[/snapback] See that, the holidays really are a fascinating and joyous time, where even two argumentative Huddlers can reach a relative agreement. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Swerski Posted December 26, 2004 Share Posted December 26, 2004 See that, the holidays really are a fascinating and joyous time, where even two argumentative Huddlers can reach a relative agreement. 632111[/snapback] If phenom concedes, that means that even I agree with him. Wow... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phenom Posted December 26, 2004 Share Posted December 26, 2004 If phenom concedes, that means that even I agree with him. Wow... 632112[/snapback] Bill confuses me when he agree's with me............. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chavez Posted December 27, 2004 Share Posted December 27, 2004 Why do you (phenom) feel the need to incessantly argue that Vick is so great at this moment in time? Are you related to him? Do you have a man-crush on him? 632026[/snapback] ...... 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.