<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Pack Attack)</div><div class='quotemain'>One good game does not a better back make... Even Brad Hoover had a breakout game against the Pack once. Hats off to Westbrook for a great game, but it doesn't change my overall opinion. (P.S. Cheers to you for being a Dick! Nice work...)</div> Right On!
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Eagles4Life)</div><div class='quotemain'>None of those guys are full-time players genious.</div> Two points, 1st, Im glad you have finally realized Im a genious, it took you a little longer than most, but thats ok, theres nothing wrong with being a little slow, it doesn't make you a bad person....it makes you a stupid person, but not bad.... 2nd point, Westbrook had 154 non-return touches, not exactly a "full-time" player, the disclaimer you added..... <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Eagles4Life)</div><div class='quotemain'>When I said yards per touch, I meant rushing and recieving, not returns.</div> Im glad you said that. Below you will find a list of players whos non-return touches produced an average better than that of your beloved Westbrook....I took the liberty of including one from each of the 4 major offensive skill positions that are likely to run with or catch the ball. Player Touches Yards Yards per Touch Brian Westbrook 154 945 6.14 Duce Staley 132 845 6.40 Randy Moss 117 1650 14.1 Jim Kliensasser 48 416 8.6 Rob Konrad 20 183 9.15 What do you know, a RB, FB, WR, and a TE all with a better ypt....hard to be top 3 when your not in the top 4 of that group....and there are hundreds of other players who had better averaged, 100's!!!!!! The question now is what disclaimer will you add. Your original statment was that he was "Top 3 in Yards per touch", after i disproved that stat, you changed it to "Top 3 in Yards per touch by full-time players", now I have destroyed that, whats the next qualifier you will add? BF1 had a good one, try that one, I might not be able to destroy that one....
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (TheBeef)</div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Eagles4Life)</div><div class='quotemain'>None of those guys are full-time players genious.</div> Two points, 1st, Im glad you have finally realized Im a genious, it took you a little longer than most, but thats ok, theres nothing wrong with being a little slow, it doesn't make you a bad person....it makes you a stupid person, but not bad.... 2nd point, Westbrook had 154 non-return touches, not exactly a "full-time" player, the disclaimer you added..... <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Eagles4Life)</div><div class='quotemain'>When I said yards per touch, I meant rushing and recieving, not returns.</div> Im glad you said that. Below you will find a list of players whos non-return touches produced an average better than that of your beloved Westbrook....I took the liberty of including one from each of the 4 major offensive skill positions that are likely to run with or catch the ball. Player Touches Yards Yards per Touch Brian Westbrook 154 945 6.14 Duce Staley 132 845 6.40 Randy Moss 117 1650 14.1 Jim Kliensasser 48 416 8.6 Rob Konrad 20 183 9.15 What do you know, a RB, FB, WR, and a TE all with a better ypt....hard to be top 3 when your not in the top 4 of that group....and there are hundreds of other players who had better averaged, 100's!!!!!! The question now is what disclaimer will you add. Your original statment was that he was "Top 3 in Yards per touch", after i disproved that stat, you changed it to "Top 3 in Yards per touch by full-time players", now I have destroyed that, whats the next qualifier you will add? BF1 had a good one, try that one, I might not be able to destroy that one....</div> Let me clarify it even more. Among Running Backs, which is the only people Westbrook should be compared to. Rushing and Recieving combined he had top 3 yards per touch. And even more, the player has to have over 100 touches. Is that better for you??? You can say all you want about Westbrook and McNabb and Owens. You can think that they are all overrated, and that's fine. You can be ignorrant if so you wish, it wouldnt be the first time I find you on the wrong side of the argument, sorry dude
Westbrook is the man. McNabb is pretty darn good. T.O is pretty darn good considering he is such an unlikable moron. Eagles are far and away the best team in the NFC. I loved that game, good job Iggles!
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Pack Attack)</div><div class='quotemain'>One good game does not a better back make... Even Brad Hoover had a breakout game against the Pack once. Hats off to Westbrook for a great game, but it doesn't change my overall opinion. (P.S. Cheers to you for being a Dick! Nice work...)</div> Take it easy Obi-Won. I'm not here to rub it in. I agree with the majority of your posts, my "beef" isn't with you, it's with BF1 and theBEEF. I've been back and forth with the dynamic duo in the past and this was one of the topics. As a Packer fan, you actually have some rational thoughts and coherent comments, unlike the dubious Ace and Gary that continue to hate on Philly. So, my apologies to you, it wasn't meant for you, despite the fact that as an Eagles fan, I, in no way feel that Philly should have re-signed Staley in the off-season.
The world hates Westbrook, and saying this was just one game. Well here you go again Westbrook has 566 yards recieving, number 1 among running backs. He averages 51.5 yards a game, number one among running backs, and he has 6, count them, 6 TD receptions. Even if you count out yesterdays performance against GB, he'd still be tied for first in TD receptions. I'm not saying this is amazing, but you can't tell me the guy isn't a threat. He has 6 receptions for 20+ yards, and 3 for 40+ yards. The only person surpassing that is Tiki Barber, and that's basically all he outranks Westbrook in. Note: I'm only referring to recieving, as that is Westbrooks main purpose in the offense
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (bednarik1963)</div><div class='quotemain'>Take it easy Obi-Won. I'm not here to rub it in. I agree with the majority of your posts, my "beef" isn't with you, it's with BF1 and theBEEF. I've been back and forth with the dynamic duo in the past and this was one of the topics. As a Packer fan, you actually have some rational thoughts and coherent comments, unlike the dubious Ace and Gary that continue to hate on Philly. So, my apologies to you, it wasn't meant for you, despite the fact that as an Eagles fan, I, in no way feel that Philly should have re-signed Staley in the off-season.</div> Nice More personal attacks
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BrianWestbrook)</div><div class='quotemain'> Note: I'm only referring to recieving, as that is Westbrooks main purpose in the offense</div> If that is his main purpose compare him to all recievers
[quote name='Eagles4Life'] Let me clarify it even more. Among Running Backs, which is the only people Westbrook should be compared to. Rushing and Recieving combined he had top 3 yards per touch. And even more, the player has to have over 100 touches. [/quote] Is that it or would you like to narrow down your statement anymore? You went from "Top 3 in the league" to "Top 3 amond full time players" to "Top 3 Among RBs with 100 + touches"....dont you want to add "among RBs named Brian that got caught giving the placekicker head at Villanova university"? [quote name='Eagles4life']Is that better for you???[/quote] Its better for you, since the statment is now accurate. Congrats, you can now see 1%, with any luck, you will continue to argue with me and I will open those eyes even more. [quote name='Eagles4life']You can say all you want about Westbrook and McNabb and Owens.[/quote] Who said anything about McNabb or Owens? I think you are a bit paranoid [quote name='eagles4life'] You can be ignorrant if so you wish, it wouldnt be the first time I find you on the wrong side of the argument, sorry dude [/quote] Once again someone presents facts and you role over and die....
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BearsFan1)</div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BrianWestbrook)</div><div class='quotemain'> Note: I'm only referring to recieving, as that is Westbrooks main purpose in the offense</div> If that is his main purpose compare him to all recievers</div> Well if all WR's starting running screens like Westbrook I would
Attention Dynamic Duo: (Ace and Gary, or BF1 and BEEF)Your ranting on these "statistics" is pretty hypocritical. Just two weeks ago I pointed out to you two where Ray Lewis ranks statistically. You couldn't respond with anything intelligent (newsflash, I know). Now your bringing up all of these stats on why Westbrook sucks? So which is it? Stats or no stats? First you hate stats and now your all about them. BF1, start saying something intelligent and quit whinning. Obviously your a hater on Philly and that's fine with me, not everyone has to like them, but when it starts to become mindless babble on your posts, it's flat out annoying. Personally, I try to stay out of other teams posts unless Philly is playing them. I suggest you do the same to give all intelligent people a break (at least me). You can't say that you actually watch everyone's game but yet your so quick to give your expertise on everyone. I post only games that I watch, which is Philly and whoever else that looks good for fantasy football (NFL ticket). If your such a die hard Bears fan, you wouldn't be able to watch very many Eagle games because they play at the same time now would you? So how "die hard" are you? Don't worry, I'll quit with the personal attacks as long as you two agree to type something intelligent for a change
No bednarik, you'll quit with the personal attacks sooner than that. Live up to what you agreed to when you joined the forums. People here are reasonable and enjoy having good conversations. Sometimes we like to poke fun at each other, but when a post gets entirely negative against a person and not just what they are saying, then you are breaking the very basic rules of the forum. Everyone here knows that this is a very leniant forum...all I ask is that you live up to the rules that you agreed to. If you forgot, I posted rule number 2 from the list of rules which can be found here: http://www.nfl-forums.com/misc.php?action=rules <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>Personal Attacks We hope these forums provide a place for discussions on football. Part of that is to engage in debates. Often times these debates will become heated. It can be tempting to lash out personally at another member in the forum, but we ask that you use self restraint. We look forward to good debates and trash talking as long as they are done with basic tastefulness. Excessive personal attacks will be deleted. If a single member obviously has the intent to only cause trouble, they will be dealt with accordingly.</div> If anyone has ANY questions/comments/rebuttals on what this means, DO NOT, I repeat, DO NOT continue it in this thread. I will delete the comment immediately. You are more than welcome to send me a private message...I'll be happy to answer your questions.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BrianWestbrook)</div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BearsFan1)</div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BrianWestbrook)</div><div class='quotemain'> Note: I'm only referring to recieving, as that is Westbrooks main purpose in the offense</div> If that is his main purpose compare him to all recievers</div> Well if all WR's starting running screens like Westbrook I would</div> That is a legitimate point, but then you have to compare things sepately, YPC running and YPC recieving. YPC rushing i sgoing to be less than recieving, so since westbrook has less carries than most backs, his recieving number pulls up his YPT.
