October 11, 200520 yr Let's see: TO, both Mosses, Harrison, Holt, Bolden, Fitzgerald, Burress, and Steve Smith I would also throw in Antonio Gates and Tony Gonzalez even though they are tight ends... For that matter I could probably throw in Brian Westbrook - doesn't he only have 1 less receiving TD than Johnson? Point is, he isn't a difference maker. If Philly had gotten Chad Johnson instead of TO, they wouldn't have gone to the Super Bowl last year. I think Moss and TO are probably the only two WR's who are. Again, with all this said, he is still fun to watch... TO, Harrison, Holt, R. Moss - OK The rest. Please. He isn't a difference maker!? Ok, right. You're right. We could take him out of the lineup and be fine. He doesn't have the 2nd most receiving yards in the AFC over the last 3 years and Housmandzadeh and crew would be just as open if he wasn't around. We can't afford to lose Chad Johnson. Period. Boldin, Fitzgerald, S. Moss, Plaxico friggin Burress, Steve Smith!? TEs!? Westbrook!? Come on man. Come on. You can't honestly believe that, and if you do, I've got a bridge for sale.
October 11, 200520 yr So what's the status on Big Ben? I need to know if he'll play next Sunday, or else I'm changing my pick because Charlie Batch sure as hell won't cut it. A helmet square on the knee can't be good.
October 11, 200520 yr He is getting a MRI today and Charlie Batch says he thinks he will be starting on Sunday.
October 11, 200520 yr Let's see: TO, both Mosses, Harrison, Holt, Bolden, Fitzgerald, Burress, and Steve Smith I would also throw in Antonio Gates and Tony Gonzalez even though they are tight ends... For that matter I could probably throw in Brian Westbrook - doesn't he only have 1 less receiving TD than Johnson? Point is, he isn't a difference maker. If Philly had gotten Chad Johnson instead of TO, they wouldn't have gone to the Super Bowl last year. I think Moss and TO are probably the only two WR's who are. Again, with all this said, he is still fun to watch... TO, Harrison, Holt, R. Moss - OK The rest. Please. He isn't a difference maker!? Ok, right. You're right. We could take him out of the lineup and be fine. He doesn't have the 2nd most receiving yards in the AFC over the last 3 years and Housmandzadeh and crew would be just as open if he wasn't around. We can't afford to lose Chad Johnson. Period. Boldin, Fitzgerald, S. Moss, Plaxico friggin Burress, Steve Smith!? TEs!? Westbrook!? Come on man. Come on. You can't honestly believe that, and if you do, I've got a bridge for sale. I agree that most of those other guys are ludicrous but Westbrook has a case. There are few players like him that you have to actually scheme for. Westbrook has the speed to beat linebackers and if covered by a CB or safety then there's a mismatch elsewhere. I love Chad Johnson but the most important player on that Eagles team other then McNabb is Westbrook even more so then TO.
October 11, 200520 yr Let's see: TO, both Mosses, Harrison, Holt, Bolden, Fitzgerald, Burress, and Steve Smith I would also throw in Antonio Gates and Tony Gonzalez even though they are tight ends... For that matter I could probably throw in Brian Westbrook - doesn't he only have 1 less receiving TD than Johnson? Point is, he isn't a difference maker. If Philly had gotten Chad Johnson instead of TO, they wouldn't have gone to the Super Bowl last year. I think Moss and TO are probably the only two WR's who are. Again, with all this said, he is still fun to watch... TO, Harrison, Holt, R. Moss - OK The rest. Please. He isn't a difference maker!? Ok, right. You're right. We could take him out of the lineup and be fine. He doesn't have the 2nd most receiving yards in the AFC over the last 3 years and Housmandzadeh and crew would be just as open if he wasn't around. We can't afford to lose Chad Johnson. Period. Boldin, Fitzgerald, S. Moss, Plaxico friggin Burress, Steve Smith!? TEs!? Westbrook!? Come on man. Come on. You can't honestly believe that, and if you do, I've got a bridge for sale. I agree that most of those other guys are ludicrous but Westbrook has a case. There are few players like him that you have to actually scheme for. Westbrook has the speed to beat linebackers and if covered by a CB or safety then there's a mismatch elsewhere. I love Chad Johnson but the most important player on that Eagles team other then McNabb is Westbrook even more so then TO. He's not a better receiver than Chad though.
October 11, 200520 yr Let's see: TO, both Mosses, Harrison, Holt, Bolden, Fitzgerald, Burress, and Steve Smith I would also throw in Antonio Gates and Tony Gonzalez even though they are tight ends... For that matter I could probably throw in Brian Westbrook - doesn't he only have 1 less receiving TD than Johnson? Point is, he isn't a difference maker. If Philly had gotten Chad Johnson instead of TO, they wouldn't have gone to the Super Bowl last year. I think Moss and TO are probably the only two WR's who are. Again, with all this said, he is still fun to watch... TO, Harrison, Holt, R. Moss - OK The rest. Please. He isn't a difference maker!? Ok, right. You're right. We could take him out of the lineup and be fine. He doesn't have the 2nd most receiving yards in the AFC over the last 3 years and Housmandzadeh and crew would be just as open if he wasn't around. We can't afford to lose Chad Johnson. Period. Boldin, Fitzgerald, S. Moss, Plaxico friggin Burress, Steve Smith!? TEs!? Westbrook!? Come on man. Come on. You can't honestly believe that, and if you do, I've got a bridge for sale. I agree that most of those other guys are ludicrous but Westbrook has a case. There are few players like him that you have to actually scheme for. Westbrook has the speed to beat linebackers and if covered by a CB or safety then there's a mismatch elsewhere. I love Chad Johnson but the most important player on that Eagles team other then McNabb is Westbrook even more so then TO. Then why dont the Eagles pay him?
October 31, 200520 yr Giants have the following: Cowboys [W] Broncos [W] Skins [W] 49ers [W] Vikings [W] They should be 8-1 by the time they play Philly [in the Meadowlands] and their offense should be rolling. We have two games against the Eagles, 1 against Seattle, and 1 against KC. Even if they go 2-2 against these guys and lose a game they should win [probably to the Cowboys], they will roll into the playoffs healthy and with a 12-4 record. FYI - have you seen YOUR schedule? Outside of next week's loss to the Chargers, your schedule is even easier [unless you think Green Bay is better than KC] and you were in the Super Bowl last year... woah woah woah...the Cowboys(who just dominated Philly), Broncos(who have played damn good since the Miami fluke/debacle), Skins (An above average team who can pull off a win), Niners(I'll give you that), and Vikings (Who knows what this team will do but if Daunte gets his head on straight and remembers how to play the quarterback position then that game isn't a guarenteed win.) are easy wins? Honestly I expect the Giants to lose at least two of those. I nominate this for homer post of the year Still nominating this post for "homer post of the year?" :mischief Unless you think the GMen are going to lose to the celler-dweller 49ers or Vikes [now without Culpepper], it looks like 7-2 heading into their game against the Eagles. I even predicted their probable loss to the Cowboys in a game they should have won... I don't mean to sound like a jerk here, but I *did* catch a lot of flack for this prediction and promised to follow up. :thumbup
October 31, 200520 yr What is it with New York fans digging up old posts to prove 'doubters' wrong? Let's see... OK you've been smoking Eli's pubes My promise... Look - you guys can trounce me later in the season if I end up eating my words. I won't be afraid to admit I was wrong IF I end up being wrong... This isn't me "proving doubters wrong," this is me defending myself from certain people [who shall remain nameless] jumping on me and calling me a homer and accusing me of "smoking Eli's pubes." Further, I posted an entire explanatory post outlining the thought process that led me to my conclusion. I won’t dig it up [it's on page 7 of this thread], but it’s a pretty good read. It has been about as accurate as any prediction can be.
October 31, 200520 yr I posted that image in response to Dodge's comments...I dont care about the Giants, even though I think Eli is a prick. It just seems that between you, Mets_bs, and Bryan digging up old posts that its getting old.
October 31, 200520 yr I posted that image in response to Dodge's comments...I dont care about the Giants, even though I think Eli is a prick. It just seems that between you, Mets_bs, and Bryan digging up old posts that its getting old. Sorry, I wasn't aware that there was a trend... I would hope that you have read enough of my posts to know that I wasn't digging this up to be an obnoxious sports fan. In fact, I dug this up to prove that I was NOT being an obnoxious sports fan and that recent history has validated my opinion. I do not consider myself to be a "homer" and take great pride in posting with as little bias as possible. I think with this information in mind, you can understand why I felt the need to defend my reputation after being accused of being a homer. Peace.
October 31, 200520 yr Giants have the following: Cowboys [W] Broncos [W] Skins [W] 49ers [W] Vikings [W] They should be 8-1 by the time they play Philly [in the Meadowlands] and their offense should be rolling. We have two games against the Eagles, 1 against Seattle, and 1 against KC. Even if they go 2-2 against these guys and lose a game they should win [probably to the Cowboys], they will roll into the playoffs healthy and with a 12-4 record. FYI - have you seen YOUR schedule? Outside of next week's loss to the Chargers, your schedule is even easier [unless you think Green Bay is better than KC] and you were in the Super Bowl last year... woah woah woah...the Cowboys(who just dominated Philly), Broncos(who have played damn good since the Miami fluke/debacle), Skins (An above average team who can pull off a win), Niners(I'll give you that), and Vikings (Who knows what this team will do but if Daunte gets his head on straight and remembers how to play the quarterback position then that game isn't a guarenteed win.) are easy wins? Honestly I expect the Giants to lose at least two of those. I nominate this for homer post of the year Still nominating this post for "homer post of the year?" :mischief Unless you think the GMen are going to lose to the celler-dweller 49ers or Vikes [now without Culpepper], it looks like 7-2 heading into their game against the Eagles. I even predicted their probable loss to the Cowboys in a game they should have won... I don't mean to sound like a jerk here, but I *did* catch a lot of flack for this prediction and promised to follow up. :thumbup You never know...I bet you Bucs fans never expected to lose to the niners either...sh*t happens in the NFL.
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.