Welcome, Guest
Pewter Report  >>  Boards  >>  The Red Board (Moderators: 3rd String Kicker, PRPatrol)  >>  Topic: Is anyone here willing to admit the Colts made the right choice in... « previous next »
Page: 1 2 3 4

wc24

***
Second String

Posts : 179
Offline
#30 : January 23, 2007, 04:25:37 PM

Chev...all due respect, McFarland didn't play well as a Buc and hasn't played well as a Colt. He occasionally puts it together for 4 or 5 plays but for most of the game he's being pushed out of the play.

Ok have you just not been watching to playoffs or are you just looking to disagree or just don't know any football.  Booger has played well in the playoffs.  He's played like the NT we had years ago.  Is it too much too little, yeah.  Would I have still made the deal, yeah.  But don't discount the guys talent and recent body of work just to satisfy your own thoughts about him and justify the deal.  It was a good deal.  Both Indy and Tampa got what the needed and wanted...

Chev....don't jump to conclusions about "where I'm coming from" based on others opinions of McFarland.  I would also appreciate you not jumping to conclusions about anyone's, particularly my, football knowledge. I could easily jump to the same conclusion about you based on the fact that we disagree on McFarland's play as a Colt but I've chosen not to denigrate your take as much as I disagree with it.

As to your point...yes I have watched the playoffs and focused almost completely on the guy this past Sunday. Except for a couple of plays here and there he was not involved. If that qualifies as playing well in your book that's fine. For the most part he's been pretty bad....at least in my book.

bradentonian

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 27663
Online
#31 : January 23, 2007, 04:28:18 PM

It will only be a good deal for us if we draft wisely

Damn good point.  ***Fingers crossed***


wc24

***
Second String

Posts : 179
Offline
#32 : January 23, 2007, 04:28:50 PM

Booger had to go regardless of the impact on the Colts. That said, they defended the run worse since he got there, although it's true they've tightened that up a lot in the playoffs (that said, the Chargers would have run all over them).

I've watched the playoffs with a close eye on #92. First, he did have an exceptional game against KC - that was one of his best performances in years, without a doubt.  He had a big sack and forced a pick in that game.  But he had 1 tackle against Baltimore (and I know tackles aren't everything for a DT, but c'mon - Booger has always had fewer tackles than other DTs). Second, it's not clear to me that he's just playing NT - it seems to me he's played a bit of both. Third, he was back to his usual ways against the Pats perfecting what I call the Booger Watch - it's where he loses leverage at the snap, stands up and sort of floats to where the tackle is eventually made and watches over the pile. The guards were killing Booger mostly without help in that game.




This is pretty much what I observed. In the KC he had one (or maybe two...I can't remember the sequence) series where he made some plays including the sack and the pressure for the pick but otherwise wasn't much of a factor. That game the Colt's DB's played out of their minds.

jerseybucsfan

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 13595
Offline
#33 : January 23, 2007, 05:49:22 PM

Sorry, Chev. Damned good is a bit of an exaggeration, don't you think? If the guy could stay on the field, maybe. But after making the Pro Football Weekly midseason all-star team in 2002, he never approached that level again. If you have to use the proviso ''when he's motivated,'' then he's not all that great. He's not hurting them by any means, but I like what we got in the deal.

In Verner We Trust

Itchalot

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 5747
Offline
#34 : January 23, 2007, 05:57:49 PM

It may be a good decision for both the Bucs and Indy. If they win the Superbowl because they plugged a hole with a decent player and that gets them the Superbowl then it was well worth it. But regardless the Bucs made a great deal to get a 2nd rounder for a player who probably wasn't going to be on the team next year.


cheveliar

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 19366
Offline
#35 : January 23, 2007, 06:12:10 PM

Chev...all due respect, McFarland didn't play well as a Buc and hasn't played well as a Colt. He occasionally puts it together for 4 or 5 plays but for most of the game he's being pushed out of the play.

Ok have you just not been watching to playoffs or are you just looking to disagree or just don't know any football. Booger has played well in the playoffs. He's played like the NT we had years ago. Is it too much too little, yeah. Would I have still made the deal, yeah. But don't discount the guys talent and recent body of work just to satisfy your own thoughts about him and justify the deal. It was a good deal. Both Indy and Tampa got what the needed and wanted...

Chev....don't jump to conclusions about "where I'm coming from" based on others opinions of McFarland. I would also appreciate you not jumping to conclusions about anyone's, particularly my, football knowledge. I could easily jump to the same conclusion about you based on the fact that we disagree on McFarland's play as a Colt but I've chosen not to denigrate your take as much as I disagree with it.

As to your point...yes I have watched the playoffs and focused almost completely on the guy this past Sunday. Except for a couple of plays here and there he was not involved. If that qualifies as playing well in your book that's fine. For the most part he's been pretty bad....at least in my book.


I didn't denigrate you I asked you a question.  So if you took it that way...so be it.  You won't be the first or the last to question my football knowledge.  My comments have been consistant.  He didn't play well after he got the contract. My bad Jersey for not mentioning him being often injured...good point.  However, their defense has been "great" in the playoffs in comparison to where they were in the regular season.  And whether you guys want to admit or not Booger has been a part of that.  If he wasn't playing well, they'd have lost already.  

Again, at the end of the day it looks like both teams got what they wanted.  We got rid of booger, their run defense in the playoffs improves, and we get another 1st day pick...I'm just as thrilled as any of you that he's gone.  But you guys are just so full of venom it's not even funny...Give the guy credit...They don't give the team that kept the league to the lowest rushing total in the "regular season" the Lombardi Trophy.  They, to include Booger, are playing well when it counts...

Without Carl Nix it feels like our running game just took a death blow to the face!


JasonOfthetower

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 6851
Offline
#36 : January 23, 2007, 06:43:54 PM

The Colts were lucky that Booger FINALLY decided to play some ball...it could be because he's actually trying earn that extra playoff paycheck and knows that if he played the same way he was playing in the regular season for the Bucs and the Colts - that he'd only get one.

It may definitely work out for Indy if they win SB XLI...but for me, I still believe a 2nd rounder (now becoming an early 3rd rounder) for McFarland is a steal.


wc24

***
Second String

Posts : 179
Offline
#37 : January 23, 2007, 08:24:14 PM

Chev...all due respect, McFarland didn't play well as a Buc and hasn't played well as a Colt. He occasionally puts it together for 4 or 5 plays but for most of the game he's being pushed out of the play.

Ok have you just not been watching to playoffs or are you just looking to disagree or just don't know any football. Booger has played well in the playoffs. He's played like the NT we had years ago. Is it too much too little, yeah. Would I have still made the deal, yeah. But don't discount the guys talent and recent body of work just to satisfy your own thoughts about him and justify the deal. It was a good deal. Both Indy and Tampa got what the needed and wanted...

Chev....don't jump to conclusions about "where I'm coming from" based on others opinions of McFarland. I would also appreciate you not jumping to conclusions about anyone's, particularly my, football knowledge. I could easily jump to the same conclusion about you based on the fact that we disagree on McFarland's play as a Colt but I've chosen not to denigrate your take as much as I disagree with it.

As to your point...yes I have watched the playoffs and focused almost completely on the guy this past Sunday. Except for a couple of plays here and there he was not involved. If that qualifies as playing well in your book that's fine. For the most part he's been pretty bad....at least in my book.


I didn't denigrate you I asked you a question.  So if you took it that way...so be it.  You won't be the first or the last to question my football knowledge.


You asked three questions all implying I didn't know what I'm talking about. So don't bs me about me taking it incorrectly.  If you wish to be an assbag be my guest but I'm going to call you on it.

I also didn't question your football knowledge. I just disagree with your opinion about how well Booger has played. You seem knowledgeable. Have some respect for others on the board whether you know who they are or not.

Quote

Again, at the end of the day you guys are just so full of venom it's not even funny...Give the guy credit...They don't give the team that kept the league to the lowest rushing total in the "regular season" the Lombardi Trophy.  They, to include Booger, are playing well when it counts...

I'm not full of venom for Booger. If he was playing well I would say that. He's not.

cheveliar

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 19366
Offline
#38 : January 24, 2007, 07:34:56 AM

Chev...all due respect, McFarland didn't play well as a Buc and hasn't played well as a Colt. He occasionally puts it together for 4 or 5 plays but for most of the game he's being pushed out of the play.

Ok have you just not been watching to playoffs or are you just looking to disagree or just don't know any football. Booger has played well in the playoffs. He's played like the NT we had years ago. Is it too much too little, yeah. Would I have still made the deal, yeah. But don't discount the guys talent and recent body of work just to satisfy your own thoughts about him and justify the deal. It was a good deal. Both Indy and Tampa got what the needed and wanted...

Chev....don't jump to conclusions about "where I'm coming from" based on others opinions of McFarland. I would also appreciate you not jumping to conclusions about anyone's, particularly my, football knowledge. I could easily jump to the same conclusion about you based on the fact that we disagree on McFarland's play as a Colt but I've chosen not to denigrate your take as much as I disagree with it.

As to your point...yes I have watched the playoffs and focused almost completely on the guy this past Sunday. Except for a couple of plays here and there he was not involved. If that qualifies as playing well in your book that's fine. For the most part he's been pretty bad....at least in my book.


I didn't denigrate you I asked you a question. So if you took it that way...so be it. You won't be the first or the last to question my football knowledge.


You asked three questions all implying I didn't know what I'm talking about. So don't bs me about me taking it incorrectly. If you wish to be an assbag be my guest but I'm going to call you on it.

I also didn't question your football knowledge. I just disagree with your opinion about how well Booger has played. You seem knowledgeable. Have some respect for others on the board whether you know who they are or not.

Quote

Again, at the end of the day you guys are just so full of venom it's not even funny...Give the guy credit...They don't give the team that kept the league to the lowest rushing total in the "regular season" the Lombardi Trophy. They, to include Booger, are playing well when it counts...

I'm not full of venom for Booger. If he was playing well I would say that. He's not.

Boss you have your panties in a bunch and it's not my responsibility to get them out for you.  You can call me on anything you like and I'll do the same just because you don't like the questions I asked doesn't mean I tried to belittle your knowledge of the game. As far as being an assbag well I'm sure you'd have to be one to correctly identify one...I always respect those who've shown it to me...

Without Carl Nix it feels like our running game just took a death blow to the face!


wc24

***
Second String

Posts : 179
Offline
#39 : January 24, 2007, 01:25:06 PM


Boss you have your panties in a bunch and it's not my responsibility to get them out for you.  You can call me on anything you like and I'll do the same just because you don't like the questions I asked doesn't mean I tried to belittle your knowledge of the game. As far as being an assbag well I'm sure you'd have to be one to correctly identify one...I always respect those who've shown it to me...

These are the three questions you asked:

Quote
Ok have you just not been watching to playoffs or are you just looking to disagree or just don't know any football.

Which of those questions is not a putdown by implicity and what kind of respect is that showing me considering this is the first time I've responded to you and in my response mentioned that I disagreed "all due respect". So don't give me that nonsense that you've always shown respect to everyone. From the first post you've made towards me you've shown zero respect.

If you had chosen to actually discuss the issue by stating Booger has played well because I've observed him.....etc. that would be a valid response and I would have responded with my agreements or disagreements.

You've chosen to argue your point by pointing out that someone who disagrees either didn't watch the game, doesn't know the game or is just out for an argument. Try discussing the point instead of playing the "I know more than you so don't argue with me" card and you'll get better responses.

It's actually too bad you've gone this route. You make a lot of good points on the board.  You've made a mistake here however.

cheveliar

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 19366
Offline
#40 : January 24, 2007, 01:26:45 PM


Boss you have your panties in a bunch and it's not my responsibility to get them out for you. You can call me on anything you like and I'll do the same just because you don't like the questions I asked doesn't mean I tried to belittle your knowledge of the game. As far as being an assbag well I'm sure you'd have to be one to correctly identify one...I always respect those who've shown it to me...

These are the three questions you asked:

Quote
Ok have you just not been watching to playoffs or are you just looking to disagree or just don't know any football.

Which of those questions is not a putdown by implicity and what kind of respect is that showing me considering this is the first time I've responded to you and in my response mentioned that I disagreed "all due respect". So don't give me that nonsense.

If you had chosen to actually discuss the issue by stating Booger has played well because I've observed him.....etc. that would be a valid response and I would have responded with my agreements or disagreements.

You've chosen to argue your point by pointing out that someone who disagrees either didn't watch the game, doesn't know the game or is just out for an argument. Try discussing the point instead of playing the "I know more than you so don't argue with me" card and you'll get better responses.



Dude, I'm done with you ok...it won't be an arguement or a discussion...you win buddy...

Without Carl Nix it feels like our running game just took a death blow to the face!


dbucfan

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 46194
Offline
#41 : January 24, 2007, 01:28:21 PM

McF wasn't working out for us. The fact that he sorta maybe helps them isn't an issue. His value here was 0, I'm not concerned with what his value there is or isn't. For us anything was better than what he's been giving us.
  Ibid.

\"A Great Coach has to have a Patient Wife, A Loyal Dog, and a Great Quarterback. . . . but not necessarily in that order\" ~ Coach Bud Grant

bradentonian

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 27663
Online
#42 : January 24, 2007, 01:28:37 PM

Again, at the end of the day it looks like both teams got what they wanted.

Is there really anything more to say?  A good trade for both teams.


dbucfan

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 46194
Offline
#43 : January 24, 2007, 01:33:53 PM

Colts did what they needed to and the bucs benefited greatly.  Worked out great.

\"A Great Coach has to have a Patient Wife, A Loyal Dog, and a Great Quarterback. . . . but not necessarily in that order\" ~ Coach Bud Grant

jerseybucsfan

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 13595
Offline
#44 : January 25, 2007, 02:35:12 AM

Chev, I never question your football knowledge. Good for Booger that things are working out for him. I just wish he had stayed on the field more with us. One of the great 'what ifs' of the last seven years, IMHO.

In Verner We Trust
Page: 1 2 3 4
Pewter Report  >>  Boards  >>  The Red Board (Moderators: 3rd String Kicker, PRPatrol)  >>  Topic: Is anyone here willing to admit the Colts made the right choice in... « previous next »
:

Hide Tools Show Tools