Originally Posted by KSig RC (Post 1769747)

Actually, you're kind of wrong in most of your analysis here, and none of it has anything to do with Limbaugh's statements (not to derail with football talk while the wounds are open).

Think about this: why do advanced metrics always have the Philly offense as better "on paper" than they are on the score sheet? Why do they have a disproportionate amount of their yards happen between the 20s?

Originally Posted by DaemonSeid (Post 1769765)

I'm not even gonna pretend that I know Philly football so I have to take you at your word.


Just in comparison and a very general one at that, from an outsider looking in...I still think that Donovan has had just as much success with what bits and peices he's had on offense (Westbrook whenever healthy plus whoever is the guest WR that year) than whatever Manning and Brady has had (at least up to this season...)


Something to consider...suppose McNabb won the Super Bowl ...how would he and Manning compare?

Just general stuff I'm throwing out there nothing to be considered gospel

So, educate me on your team, please.

** go for the hijack **

Originally Posted by KSigkid (Post 1769768)

The advanced metrics show that Manning is much more accurate than McNabb; McNabb does some things really well as a quarterback, but his accuracy is not one of his stronger suits. That's not just because of lack of receiving talent...there are ways to measure it independent of who the receivers are on the field.

Originally Posted by DaemonSeid (Post 1769366)

Shortcut? Please?

Limbaugh is a long straight road leading nowhere...no mapquest needed.




No ...he was not.

They DID go to the Super Bowl in 2004 right?

Meanwhile that SAME year when his comments were made, what happened to Limbaugh?

Fired from ESPN and then not a few weeks afterwards, brought up on drug charges...Oxycontin remember?

...and you may want to check but he is one of the FEW high caliber QBs playing right now that gets more done with less to work with unlike uuuhhh...the Colts and Patriots?

Gosh, just imagine if T.O. didn't have such a primadonna persona what Philly could have accomplished.

Hell, dare I say, McNabb thus far is one of the ONLY reasons why the Eagles are on the map right now. Since he was drafted how many winning seasons has Philly had?

And ummm what about the NUMBER ONE PICK, Tim Couch? Where is he now?
And if memory serves Philly BOOED the decision (like they tend to boo most things) to draft McNabb.

Who was the last big name QB that Philly had before McNabb?

Randall Cunningham.

So, no...I would have to say Limbaugh was and still is very wrong about McNabb and Black QBs in general.

Originally Posted by madmax (Post 1769778)

Your points are weak. Are you going to offer something that actually disputes Limbaugh's opinion on McNabb? I could just as easily point out Kordell Stewart, Akili Smith and all the black QBs that suck. That would probably be as stupid as all of your points.

McNabb is overrated!! Try watching a game. It is obvious that you get your info from Sports Center and you don't really watch the Eagles.

I will fill you in since you are clueless. The Eagles win with DEFENSE and special teams and Brian Westbrook.

McNabb can't shine Peyton Manning or Tom Brady's shoes. They are winners and leaders. McNabb is a punk ass momma's boy that had to get is brother to call TO and ask TO to stop picking on little Donovan.

AJ Feeley who sucks actually has a better winning percentage than Donovan. Jeff Garcia has a better winning percentage as an Eagle than Donovan.

Jerry Mondesire the head of the Philly chapter of the NAACP also rips Donovan. He doesn't rip him because he is black he just knows more about football than DamonSeid. Pro Boxer Bernard Hopkins rips McNabb every chance he gets.

Originally Posted by DaemonSeid (Post 1769802)

** continuing the hijack**

So you are saying, if you give McNabb a high caliber WR, he wouldn't be better?

AJ Feely has a higher percentage but...is he starting? No.

Has he started all 16 games in a season? No.

I gues if I played say like 10 or 11 games and won 8 of them I would have a higher winning percentage too!

How many Pro Bowls has he been to? None

McNabb? 5


I personally think that McNabb and the Eagles do well considering they play in one of the toughest if not THE toughest division in the NFL.

Also this in keeping that I think that right now, as far as the Eagles have gone...they have gotten a lot farther with less than some 'stacked' teams like NY and Dallas did in at least these past 5 years.

And Brian Westbrook? WHen he is healthy HE IS A BEAST but hwne he is down...nothing to DO and it really still doesn't help that there is far to middlin' talent at WR. Put a Reggie Wayne out there and he would go to town...look at 2004..the year they went to the Super Bowl. Even before he got hurt, he was well on his way with having some of the best numbers he has had in his career thankfully in part to T.O.

Actually if I remember, THAT WAS his best year.

Shyte...look at this year alone!! NOBODY had the Eagles getting this far...and yeah, I am sincerely sorry that they lost but come on...NOBODY had them pegged for even a playoff spot.

I will be 'nice' and not call you stupid in return, but really you could have come up with a better example than a 3rd stringer like AJ Feeley.

Rip on McNabb all you want but best believe he works well with spare parts but put some high caliber WRs on that team, and I think he would prove you wrong.

And since I believe you are letting your intense dislike of McNabb blind you from making a this a relevant discourse, let's end the hijack here shall we?

And...for the record, I don't do a lot of ESPN. I have other sources that I use also and OF COURSE I DON'T GET THE EAGLES....I GET THOSE DAYUMED REDSKINS!!!!!! AAARRRGHGHGHHHHH

Originally Posted by KSigkid (Post 1769768)

The advanced metrics show that Manning is much more accurate than McNabb; McNabb does some things really well as a quarterback, but his accuracy is not one of his stronger suits. That's not just because of lack of receiving talent...there are ways to measure it independent of who the receivers are on the field.

You could make the argument Westbrook is one of the top 5-10 offensive players in the NFL...so as far as pieces go, he's a pretty good one to have. Plus, TO played well when he was in Philly, when looking purely at numbers (although I'm not sure if he had as many drops as he has with the Cowboys).

I'm not a Philly fan, so I'll leave the specifics up to KSigRC...I'm just going off of what I've seen on TV, and read on sites like Football Outsiders.

ETA: Madmax is anti-McNabb, though, so you'll probably hear about it from him. Plus, you mentioned something about Philly fans booing, so he'll probably jump in on that too.

Originally Posted by KSigkid (Post 1730829)

Woah, you may want to re-read my statement, because I was saying that Philly's reputation isn't deserved. Again, I said that "I don't think the reality is nearly as bad as the reputation." Thus, I said I don't really believe the reputation (which is the perception outside of Philly); I just think their fans are no worse than fans in New York or Boston or other cities that are crazy about sports.

People say the same thing about Boston (Fenway in particular) and NY (Yankee Stadium in particular) without having ever been there or having been to a game. I've seen Yankees fans treated well in Fenway, and Sox fans treated well in Yankee Stadium.
.......

Originally Posted by madmax (Post 1770068)

Your problem is you are a racist. You probably went to a Jerimiah Wright type church were you were brainwashed to hate whitey.


holla

Originally Posted by PhiGam (Post 1770072)

McNabb is good but Manning is one of the all time greats. As a die hard Dan Marino fan I will say that Peyton is the ONLY player that I will put on the same level as Marino in terms of passing ability.
The Eagles offense is only good when Brian Westbrook plays, he may be the best RB in the league right now.

Originally Posted by DaemonSeid (Post 1770083)

I will agree with you on the first part but may disagree with you on the last part.

Would you put Westbrook over LT? (not gonna include AP in because he hasn't played long enough) If so, why?

Originally Posted by PhiGam (Post 1770087)

I feel that Westbrook is pretty much the entire Eagles' offense. He is explosive in the open field and their second best receiver (Jackson is amazing).
Tomlinson may be better but its hard to tell because that offense has a great receiving core (Jackson, Chambers, Gates, etc.) Not to mention that the guy backing up Tomlinson is Darren Sproles. This was a down year for him but LaDanian can't have another season where he averages 3.8 per carry if he wants to be considered the best IMO.
Side note: The fact that Favre made it to the pro bowl over Pennington proves that its a popularity contest.

Originally Posted by PhiGam (Post 1770087)

I feel that Westbrook is pretty much the entire Eagles' offense. He is explosive in the open field and their second best receiver (Jackson is amazing).
Tomlinson may be better but its hard to tell because that offense has a great receiving core (Jackson, Chambers, Gates, etc.) Not to mention that the guy backing up Tomlinson is Darren Sproles. This was a down year for him but LaDanian can't have another season where he averages 3.8 per carry if he wants to be considered the best IMO.
Side note: The fact that Favre made it to the pro bowl over Pennington proves that its a popularity contest.

Originally Posted by madmax (Post 1770107)

Westbrook isn't the entire offense. You even said Jackson is amazing. Some people even think he might be done. By the end of the season he only had about 120 yards in the last 3 playoff games combined. He made one play in the playoffs and that was a 2 yard screen pass in the Minnesotta game in which he went 70 yrds untouched with great downfield blocking. Corell Buckholter was a better rb by the end of the year. Most of the local press was calling for Buckholter to get the ball more. The Eagles offense would be fine if Andy Kotite would run the ball. The Eagles O line is built to run but Andy KOtite has games in which he passes 25 STRAIGHT times(Chargers a couple yrs ago) or 15 straight times this year vs the Redskins. Then when the team is trailing with no timeouts and the team is running the 2 minute drill Andy KOtite strarts running the ball. F'ing brilliant. With 10 seconds left in the game and no timeouts the ball on the 20 Troy Aikman specifically points out that Kordell McNabb has to go for the endzone or the clock won't stop and the Eagles will lose. What does Kordell do? He throws a 19 yard pass and the clock runs out and the Eagles lose.



Your point about Farve is 100% on the money. Farve was selected to the Pro Bowl and most Jets fans want to get rid of him. It is a popularity contest.

Originally Posted by DaemonSeid (Post 1770109)

Now...see how smart you sound while avoiding all the ig'nant shit?

Stay on that track and perhaps we can have some kind of civil gentlemanly discourse

Originally Posted by madmax (Post 1770111)

Dont get uppity. You brought Randall Cuningham and Tim Couch. It was obvious YOU were trying to play the race card. Then when I slapped you around the block with the facts about McNabb you backtracked.

Originally Posted by DaemonSeid (Post 1770090)

Good observation and part of that I think is due to the lack of serious talent at WR.

Your RB should not be somewhere near your top WR if you have capable WRs on the field.

This goes right back into what I was saying:

http://www.philly.com/philly/hp/spor...er_talent.html

Good point on LT BTW also. And the last 2 seasons (since Norv Turner took over) have been down seasons for LT.

Originally Posted by madmax (Post 1770107)

Westbrook isn't the entire offense. You even said Jackson is amazing. Some people even think he might be done. By the end of the season he only had about 120 yards in the last 3 playoff games combined. He made one play in the playoffs and that was a 2 yard screen pass in the Minnesotta game in which he went 70 yrds untouched with great downfield blocking. Corell Buckholter was a better rb by the end of the year. Most of the local press was calling for Buckholter to get the ball more. The Eagles offense would be fine if Andy Kotite would run the ball. The Eagles O line is built to run but Andy KOtite has games in which he passes 25 STRAIGHT times(Chargers a couple yrs ago) or 15 straight times this year vs the Redskins. Then when the team is trailing with no timeouts and the team is running the 2 minute drill Andy KOtite strarts running the ball. F'ing brilliant. With 10 seconds left in the game and no timeouts the ball on the 20 Troy Aikman specifically points out that Kordell McNabb has to go for the endzone or the clock won't stop and the Eagles will lose. What does Kordell do? He throws a 19 yard pass and the clock runs out and the Eagles lose.



Your point about Farve is 100% on the money. Farve was selected to the Pro Bowl and most Jets fans want to get rid of him. It is a popularity contest.

Originally Posted by PhiGam (Post 1770125)

Norv Turner sucks- I blame the collapse of the Dolphins on his poor decision-making as our offensive coordinator.

Originally Posted by DaemonSeid (Post 1770130)

we can agree on that..I still dont understand how he keeps a job in the NFL.

Originally Posted by nate2512 (Post 1770158)

I have to disagree with the fact that Donovan McNabb is superstar quarterback. Yes, he is a good solid quarterback, but he isn't headed to the hall of fame. While he has been selected to five pro bowls, of which he was only selected to start one. He has no league MVP selections. Has yet to win a super bowl. Sure he's a good quarterback, he wins games.

ETA: Sure McNabb is good enough to start, no one is arguing that, but for a STARTING quarterback, he's mediocre at best.

and as for the limbaugh case, i think first we should define failure.

1. The condition or fact of not achieving the desired end or ends: the failure of an experiment.
2. One that fails: a failure at one's career.
3. The condition or fact of being insufficient or falling short: a crop failure.
4. A cessation of proper functioning or performance: a power failure.
5. Nonperformance of what is requested or expected; omission: failure to report a change of address.
6. The act or fact of failing to pass a course, test, or assignment.
7. A decline in strength or effectiveness.
8. The act or fact of becoming bankrupt or insolvent.

I would have to agree that according to the definintion above, I would like see Obama fail in accordance with defintion 1, 3, 4, 5*, 7*.

* Now these two are tricky and I feel I must justify myself, I disagree with what most people expect of him. Most people expect him to push his liberal agenda of radical ideaologies that I do not believe will be good for this country. In that I hope he fails. He may be a very strong and effective president, but if it's strong and effective in terms that I disagree with, it doesn't do me any good.

As far as anything Obama has done so far. I disagree with everything. And I can now rightfully say that now that he's actually done it.

For everyone of who bashed bush and were part of the result of his low approval rating, you say that because I agreed with him, I was an idiot. Well, I am now on the other side of the fence, I disapprove of Obama's job as president, and now, all these people who preach tolerance are going to say that I'm an idiot for disagreeing. I'm not giving up my morals or standards just becuase it isn't the popular thing to do. You people need to look at yourself and decide just how fucking hypocritical you are. If a radical had said these things about Bush he would have been PRAISED. Where's the JUSTICE in first amendmant?

Originally Posted by DaemonSeid (Post 1770167)

And again...what I and some others have said awhile ago, when someone says something, you attach what is said to the speaker.

Based on context of what you said, and by the fact that I don't know you personally, I can only take you at face value. Someone who knows you or has heard you speak on the topic will be able to weigh in on your words and assign credibility to what you said and better understand on where you are coming from when you make the above statement.

Rush on the other hand is a different story and as shown earlier he has stepped over the line more than enough times (I have even pointed it out earlier using his own words) that anyone worth his salt knows when that statement was made he merely wasn't talking about Obama's policies. It is very difficult to simply translate anything Rush says and thinks he is being sincere or goodly when we know his past history of bigotry.

Originally Posted by nate2512 (Post 1770171)

I urge you to please explain apartment from pushing his agenda and policies, what else could he possibly fail at?

Originally Posted by DaemonSeid (Post 1770172)

You're asking the wrong person because I am not the one wishing him nor his admin failure.

I believe that if his admin succeeds WE ALL succeed.

But that is just me, plus most of the 60% that voted for him.

Originally Posted by PhiGam (Post 1770126)

How did you guys do in the games where Westbrook didn't play? I want to say that yall we 0-4 when he didn't play. Without him all of the Eagles check down/ screen options are eliminated and as we all know McNabb is terrible against the Blitz. Buckhalter may be as good of a runner as Westbrook but in a west coast style offense it is far more important to have a running back who is a threat on screen plays.

Originally Posted by madmax (Post 1770364)

Westbrook only missed 2 games. The Eagles were 1-1 and should have been 2-0 but Andy Kotite gave away the Bears game. The team went 8-5-1 with Westbrook.

Originally Posted by DaemonSeid (Post 1769016)

heh...for those that got offended at what Jay Z said....take a gander at this:


RUSH: I got a request here from a major American print publication. "Dear Rush: For the Obama [Immaculate] Inauguration we are asking a handful of very prominent politicians, statesmen, scholars, businessmen, commentators, and economists to write 400 words on their hope for the Obama presidency. We would love to include you. If you could send us 400 words on your hope for the Obama presidency, we need it by Monday night, that would be ideal." Now, we're caught in this trap again. The premise is, what is your "hope." My hope, and please understand me when I say this. I disagree fervently with the people on our side of the aisle who have caved and who say, "Well, I hope he succeeds. We've got to give him a chance." Why? They didn't give Bush a chance in 2000. Before he was inaugurated the search-and-destroy mission had begun. I'm not talking about search-and-destroy, but I've been listening to Barack Obama for a year-and-a-half. I know what his politics are. I know what his plans are, as he has stated them. I don't want them to succeed.

If I wanted Obama to succeed, I'd be happy the Republicans have laid down. And I would be encouraging Republicans to lay down and support him. Look, what he's talking about is the absorption of as much of the private sector by the US government as possible, from the banking business, to the mortgage industry, the automobile business, to health care. I do not want the government in charge of all of these things. I don't want this to work. So I'm thinking of replying to the guy, "Okay, I'll send you a response, but I don't need 400 words, I need four: I hope he fails." (interruption) What are you laughing at? See, here's the point. Everybody thinks it's outrageous to say. Look, even my staff, "Oh, you can't do that." Why not? Why is it any different, what's new, what is unfair about my saying I hope liberalism fails? Liberalism is our problem. Liberalism is what's gotten us dangerously close to the precipice here. Why do I want more of it? I don't care what the Drive-By story is. I would be honored if the Drive-By Media headlined me all day long: "Limbaugh: I Hope Obama Fails." Somebody's gotta say it.


http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/dai...113.guest.html


Video:

http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/pol...r.limbaugh.cnn

I guess it would be wrong if somebody says that they hope Rush ODs.....hehe

"Somebody's gotta say it."

Originally Posted by LadyDread2010 (Post 1771324)

He's just highly pissed off because Republicans didn't get the White House this term. Obama wants a bipartisan government,but there are those who do not agree with Obama. The only thing that matters is that Obama does the best he can. After all,he has quite a mess to clean up.

Originally Posted by nate2512 (Post 1771552)

Can't clean up a mess with a dirty mop.

Originally Posted by DaemonSeid (Post 1769016)

heh...for those that got offended at what Jay Z said....take a gander at this: