Remember when we drafted Maddox how Theisman just couldn't believe it and told him so live on national TV? Something to the effect that he was too young and will be sent to the World Leage for awhile and maybe with a lot more reps he could be somebody.
Well a good buddy of mine says the Steelers are in love with Charlie Batch as Rothlisberger's back-up. Maybe, now that he's showed something we should take a look at him. Showed a lot of grit for the steelers and has to be as good as Kanell.
Results 1 to 15 of 16
Thread: Theisman was right
-
06-28-2005, 02:09 PM #1Special Teams
- Join Date
- May 2005
- Posts
- 1,078
Theisman was right
-
06-28-2005, 02:15 PM #2RIP BFC, D-Will, Damien
- Join Date
- Apr 2005
- Location
- Tucson, AZ
- Posts
- 13,488
We would probably have the same luck with him as we did with Garcia.
Maddox wants to be a starter, not a backup. And he's not good enough to start.
-----
-
06-28-2005, 02:15 PM #3Captain
- Join Date
- Oct 2003
- Location
- hampshire,england
- Posts
- 12,619
even a blind squirrel finds his nuts once in a while.
Originally Posted by DiehardinAlaska
AS GOOD AS KANELL??? GET HIM QUICK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
kanell is ok as back-up, not great but alot better then jarious jackson looked.
-
06-29-2005, 01:48 PM #4Practice Squad
- Join Date
- Oct 2003
- Location
- Nebraska
- Posts
- 148
I'm sold on the fact that the Steelers have a very quarterback friendly offense. Tommy Maddox is flat out bad,yet he still had a couple good season with the Steelers in 2002 and 2003. Then Ben Roethlisberger comes in and had a passer rating of over 100 as a rookie. How many rookie QB's have done that? I know he didn't throw that many passes, but its still impressive. If Kordell Stewart can take the Steelers to the AFC championship game, it has to be VERY FRIENDLY system. I agree, stay away from Maddox. Originally Posted by topscribe
[IMG]http://i27.photobucket.com/albums/c168/Crashman44b/dayne.jpg[/IMG]
"The Dayne agreement"
-
06-30-2005, 03:29 PM #5Banned User
- Join Date
- Jun 2005
- Location
- Realism.
- Posts
- 2,362
bwahahahahaha Originally Posted by Iceman_44b
-
06-30-2005, 08:10 PM #6Trouble
- Join Date
- Feb 2004
- Posts
- 18,970
I think Maddox would be a HUGE improvement over Kannel. Kannel just plain stinks. Maddox looked really good in 2003 season.
-
06-30-2005, 08:30 PM #7Practice Squad
- Join Date
- Oct 2004
- Location
- Indiana
- Posts
- 26
im thinking maddox might be an improvement over kannel but kannel didnt even play at all last year so hopefully we wont have to worry about the back up situation and kannel didnt look too bad in preseason last year
-
06-30-2005, 08:59 PM #8Playmaker
- Join Date
- Jun 2004
- Location
- Denver
- Posts
- 4,838
Originally Posted by Iceman_44b
They watered down their system for Ben, which is the smart thing to do, they have talked often how it was simpler for him, so he could fill in right away.... they also ran the ball 60% of the time...
If any system is qb friendly: it would be San Frans old one.. when they had Montana, then Young, then Garcia... that system wit qbs was like ours wit rbs....Bronco fan from Packer Land.
Lefty Writer on The Sports Show with Woody Paige and Les Shapiro
Tweet me @JoRo_5551
-
07-01-2005, 12:46 PM #9Banned User
- Join Date
- Mar 2004
- Posts
- 8,462
Originally Posted by Iceman_44b
Quote of the week.
Points to you
-
07-01-2005, 01:11 PM #10Banned User
- Join Date
- Mar 2004
- Posts
- 8,462
We have to stop meeting like this. Originally Posted by Ravage!!!
Danny is an OK B/u Qb. hopefully we will not need him this year. Tommy one would cost to much and sure he only wants to come back here to play us. after the abuse he took from John boy. BTW wan't PAT the owner when that happened.
danny boy drafted him as a slap in the face of golden boy.
Don't think the Pat would allow that either.
-
07-01-2005, 03:03 PM #11Practice Squad
- Join Date
- Apr 2004
- Posts
- 407
A lot of that success has to go to Jerome Bettis. When you've got a solid running game, it sure does help the pass. Originally Posted by Iceman_44b
[url=http://www.coloradoprog.com][img]http://img57.photobucket.com/albums/v175/-SASR-/ring_CARS_banner.jpg[/img]
[/url]
-
07-01-2005, 05:31 PM #12Special Teams
- Join Date
- May 2005
- Posts
- 1,078
Lightning struck twice
Originally Posted by DeuceOfClub
Remember, last year during a Sunday night game he predicted Plummer was ready for stardom. Said he had all the tools and liked his grit and said that the third year in the system he'd be comfortable and that he would finally get the picture that he he could relax and play ball because he's not in AZ anymore and has a supporting cast now. I'm paraphrasing but that's what he said. Probably made beer fly out of the noses of all the fans that have heard him slam the Broncos over the years. It was unbelievable.
-
07-01-2005, 10:05 PM #13King of the Echo People
- Join Date
- Oct 2004
- Posts
- 14,751
Kanell is a decent backup. He just has been out of the league for a while. You could have it a lot worse. You could just have Mauck and Van Pelt. Not someone you'd want to leave your season hopes with - a pair of inexperienced players.
Now to the topic at hand. Maddox wouldn't want to go back to Denver. Look at his past there. He was supposed to be Elway's replacement when Reeves and Elway had their spat. But of course Elway won and Reeves was fired and took Tommy Boy with him.
-
07-02-2005, 07:09 AM #14RIP BFC, D-Will, Damien
- Join Date
- Apr 2005
- Location
- Tucson, AZ
- Posts
- 13,488
Yes . . .
Also, Maddox wants to start, and he has no chance of that in Denver. Originally Posted by Dawgfan
That's why Garcia bolted before the negotiations became serious.
-----
-
07-02-2005, 09:36 PM #15Trouble
- Join Date
- Feb 2004
- Posts
- 18,970
They alllll want to start. But there are very few openings in the NFL for starters. Chicago? Detroit (if harrington fails this year)?
Maddox I th ink had his time in the spot-light. He made his way BACK from the XFL and into a starting role in the NFL... then was beat out by a rookie. His starting years are done. IMO.
I can't help but think that Kannel is absolutly horendous.
-
