Are You Ready For Some FootBall - Week 1

[Ming]

If Barry hadn't retired early because of a temper tantrum, he would be the all time leader... by a long shot. Emmitt would never have caught him. Barry's speed and moves makes him a far better choice than Emmitt

[Imran Siddiqui]

I'm sorry, did you take Emmitt Smith over Barry Sanders?

Yep... Barry was amazing to watch, but he had this tendancy to take a bunch of negative yardage carries before springing for an 80 yard gain. Emmitt would at least keep getting you positive yardage. And there isn't a better player at playing hurt.

Big difference between 4.1 and 4.4 when you consider the numbers of attempts.

And 38% more yards...

4.1 vs. 4.4 isn't that great of a difference.

38%? Did you mess up your math? It's 28% more yards, BUT also 21% more carries. Allen has more TDs as well with those less carries.

Just be happy I didn't put Eric Dickerson .

[Guynemer]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

I'm sorry, did you take Emmitt Smith over Barry Sanders?

Yep... Barry was amazing to watch, but he had this tendancy to take a bunch of negative yardage carries before springing for an 80 yard gain. Emmitt would at least keep getting you positive yardage.

You think that might have something to do with the Dallas offensive line as compared to the Detroit offensive line?

[Imran Siddiqui]

You think that might have something to do with the Dallas offensive line as compared to the Detroit offensive line?

Perhaps, but if I was considering offensive lines, it would result in a much greater headache.

And it wasn't just the o-lines. Sanders' style of running lent itself to more negative yardage then a big positive run. All those moves in the backfield, changing fields and such lead to that. I'm not saying he wasn't great, he was. I just think on a team, I may prefer a straight ahead running like Emmitt.

[monolith94]

"Apparently the last two Superbowl winners (TB and NE) LOST their first game. So look at the losers to see who'll go this year ... maybe that is what Miami was thinking."

I think that maybe a bit too much emphasis is placed on the first game of the season. All the time during the season teams have turnarounds (the Rams when they used Bulger) and collapses (the chargers, iirc). The eagles - buccs game was a good example. They're two teams that seem nearly equal in quality, but because the Buccs managed to push it over the top this time, everyone's going to say that they're going to be the BIG TEAM this year. I'm not so sure about that.

I also don't think there's going to be any single team that is going to be as impenetrable this season as last season. I think there's been alot of improvement from the poorer contenders of last year (Texans, Viking, Lions) and some of the greater teams have been slipping (Miami, Packers, Browns).

That said, I think the steelers will be pretty good this year, and if the patriots don't win their next game, I may just stop watching alltogether to spare myself the heartbreak.

[Imran Siddiqui]

I also don't think there's going to be any single team that is going to be as impenetrable this season as last season. I think there's been alot of improvement from the poorer contenders of last year (Texans, Viking, Lions) and some of the greater teams have been slipping (Miami, Packers, Browns).

Personally I feel the AFC is more wide open than the NFC, at the present. It isn't just because the NFC has the Superbowl winner, either. Of course we definetly could have some surprise NFC teams (Carolina and Seattle, perhaps) which could make things a bit more interesting.

[Ming]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
38%? Did you mess up your math? It's 28% more yards,

16728 divided by 12243 = 1.366 or +37 percent more.
You did it backwards dividing 12243 by 16728

(the 38 was typo, meant 37)

[monolith94]

"Personally I feel the AFC is more wide open than the NFC, at the present."

Oh, definitely. I think anyone who would argue against that is blinding themselves due to fan faith.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Ooops, I confused ' % more yards' with '% less yards'.. that means I did the carries wrong.

Should be 27% more carries.

[Ming]

NP... was just wondering about your math

[Sava]

Originally posted by SlowwHand
No they're not.
Wait until they play a team with a QB, instead of a RB posing as a QB.
It was just the damned Eagles, after all.

How about Rich Gannon... how'd he do against the Bucs D?

[-Jrabbit]

Imram -- Re Payton

1. You quoted career yards. The list is by decades. Look at the stats for the 80s. (Not that it matters. Whether compared over career or per decade, it's Payton hands down.)

2. You say "Al Davis didn't like Allen." I say, Marcus Allen was not a load back. Barely in the team picture. AND got a bunch of his TDs as a goal line specialist late in his career.

MOVING ON --

The 70s
QB: Roger Staubach, Dal

Over BRADSHAW????????
Truly a joke.

I also wonder about (not necessarily dispute!) the Swann pick. Never led the league in catches or yards IIRC. In fact, Stallworth beat him on stats several times. I was a huge fan, but there had to be better. (Don Maynard, Otis Taylor, Fred Biletnikov, and Lance Alworth all come to mind, but had a lot of their career time iin the 60s.) To discuss...

[monolith94]

Jesus christ - I can't believe we're playing the eagles next game!!! Good lord, that is going to be tough to win... Do I even want to watch??? I'm scared..

At least I'm pretty confident we can beat the jets the week after, though.

[Imran Siddiqui]

You quoted career yards. The list is by decades. Look at the stats for the 80s.

I did as well. That would have required a lot of extra work such as counting all the yards and carries in the 80s and calculating my own YPC. I'm not THAT bored... after all I got a bunch of people riled up to talk to me .

Btw, it wasn't like Allen's stats were better in the 90s or whatever .

You say "Al Davis didn't like Allen."

Not just me... just about every pundit noticed that the feud between Davis and Allen manifested itself on the playing field. How else do we account for the fact that Allen rushed for 69 att in 89, 63 att in 91, and 67 att in 92, when he wasn't injured. In 93, after leaving for KC, Allen had 206 att.

Over BRADSHAW????????

Um... YAH!

Staubach:
Comp %: 57%
Yards: 22700
Y/A: 7.7
TD: 153
Int: 109

Bradshaw:
Comp %: 51.9%
Yards: 27989
Y/A: 7.2
TD: 212
Int: 210

[Imran Siddiqui]

I also wonder about (not necessarily dispute!) the Swann pick. Never led the league in catches or yards IIRC. In fact, Stallworth beat him on stats several times. I was a huge fan, but there had to be better. (Don Maynard, Otis Taylor, Fred Biletnikov, and Lance Alworth all come to mind, but had a lot of their career time iin the 60s.)

I think Swanny is better than Stallworth, personally. Swann got the TDs and big plays. Maynard only played 3 years in the 70s (and not very well). Taylor had some good years in the 70s, but not as good as Swann. Biletnikov is the closest (3rd WR on my team, if he can beat out Cliff Branch ), just got barely beat out by Swann, because of Swann's big game ability. Alworth as well played 3 seasons in the 70s, at the tail end of his career.

The 70s weren't the best time for wideouts.