Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Team will be better without Marshall

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #76
    Originally posted by CanDB View Post
    Forget it.......I did not emphasize the importance of chemistry/character in my post, and sadly, you have jumped on it. All I was trying to do is say......of course talent is important. But less talented teams can beat more talented teams, with the right mix of those so called intangibles.

    Where's those stats you asked me to provide???????
    Depends how much less talented. The Rams or Lions could have the most chemistry in the league, but they are not winning a superbowl. I'm saying talent is more important than chemistry. We traded away a lot of talent for players that we hope will have good chemistry. I just don't think the trade off is worth it.

    I don't actually intend to research those stats, it's common sense really. Teams that are losing throw the ball more. That will make the QB and WR's numbers look better even in a losing effort. I get very excited when my fantasy QB's team is down a few TDs.

    Originally posted by DancingHorsey View Post
    How'd that work out for them in the end?
    They lost by 3 points to a more talented New England team. Most people didn't think the Eagles would even be very competitive in that game.

    Originally posted by Gatorgirl View Post
    Exactly! And is he with the eagles now? Heck even the bills thought him too much trouble after one season. Guy's talented but just too much drama
    The Bills signed him to a 1 year contract and had no interest in re-signing him because he played horribly. That's all.

    Comment


    • #77
      Originally posted by I Eat Staples View Post
      Depends how much less talented. The Rams or Lions could have the most chemistry in the league, but they are not winning a superbowl. I'm saying talent is more important than chemistry. We traded away a lot of talent for players that we hope will have good chemistry. I just don't think the trade off is worth it.

      I don't actually intend to research those stats, it's common sense really. Teams that are losing throw the ball more. That will make the QB and WR's numbers look better even in a losing effort. I get very excited when my fantasy QB's team is down a few TDs.



      They lost by 3 points to a more talented New England team. Most people didn't think the Eagles would even be very competitive in that game.



      The Bills signed him to a 1 year contract and had no interest in re-signing him because he played horribly. That's all.
      Considering who the Bills had at QB, he actually played pretty decent. And I thought it was a 2 year deal.

      Comment


      • #78
        Originally posted by I Eat Staples View Post
        Depends how much less talented. The Rams or Lions could have the most chemistry in the league, but they are not winning a superbowl. I'm saying talent is more important than chemistry. We traded away a lot of talent for players that we hope will have good chemistry. I just don't think the trade off is worth it.

        I don't actually intend to research those stats, it's common sense really. Teams that are losing throw the ball more. That will make the QB and WR's numbers look better even in a losing effort. I get very excited when my fantasy QB's team is down a few TDs.
        You say the obvious........why bother?

        Comment


        • #79
          Originally posted by Amari24 View Post
          Considering who the Bills had at QB, he actually played pretty decent. And I thought it was a 2 year deal.
          That's true, but the point is he's no longer a Bill because of performance or age, not character concerns. And I'm pretty sure it was a 1 year deal, but maybe it had an option for a second year.

          Comment


          • #80
            Originally posted by CanDB View Post
            You say the obvious........why bother?
            You were disagreeing with the obvious before. McD chose character over talent. I said talent was more important and you disagreed. If you support McD, you must believe character is more important than talent.

            Comment


            • #81
              Originally posted by I Eat Staples View Post
              You were disagreeing with the obvious before. McD chose character over talent. I said talent was more important and you disagreed. If you support McD, you must believe character is more important than talent.
              Have a nice night.....and don't forget to have the last word.

              Comment


              • #82
                Originally posted by I Eat Staples View Post
                The Bills signed him to a 1 year contract and had no interest in re-signing him because he played horribly. That's all.
                the entire bills roster plays horribly. TO is too focused on his TV carreer and being cool than winning games. And I agree he didn't look bad. Would you put his talent in league with Marshall? Again a talented player with a shifty attitude just isn't a benefit.

                Comment


                • #83
                  Originally posted by Gatorgirl View Post
                  the entire bills roster plays horribly. TO is too focused on his TV carreer and being cool than winning games. And I agree he didn't look bad. Would you put his talent in league with Marshall? Again a talented player with a shifty attitude just isn't a benefit.
                  Rofl, look at Ocho. I wouldn't want 2 guys on my team doing TV shows. It's crazy.

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    Originally posted by CanDB View Post
                    Have a nice night.....and don't forget to have the last word.
                    Ignore him. :thumb: It does wonders for my hypertension.
                    "Stultum est timere quod vitare non potes." ~ Publilius Syrus

                    Comment


                    • #85
                      Originally posted by Amari24 View Post
                      Rofl, look at Ocho. I wouldn't want 2 guys on my team doing TV shows. It's crazy.
                      Really! I think that it would be a conflict of interest. I wouldnot be suprised if soon contracts include a non reality tv clause

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X