Saints defense has actually played well...

Tobias-Reiper · 11-24-2005, 07:44 PM

Originally Posted by BlackonBlack

... I'm going to stop right here, because you are just rambling now... it's past the amusing point, and now it is just sad...

No you are gonna stop right there because I proved myself right and you wrong...There were several other games many more that were only 3) 3rd downs converted and as I said many others that were only 4) 3rd down conversions converted. And this team went to the Superbowl, you said find the games were they had 5 are more turnovers I did...And now you the little weasel sneaks off because you can't respond to the rest.

.. no, dimwit...
Find a game where their offense had 5 turnovers AND WON...
Find a game where their offense failed to convert on 3rd downs AND WON

... for Pete's sake, stop it... seriously...

saintswhodi · 11-24-2005, 10:32 PM

Originally Posted by BlackandBlue

Wait, wait, wait. Tobias asked you the following questions:

On how many games during their Superbowl run did the Panthers turn the ball 5 times, or failed to convert less than 3 3rd downs, or failed to score points of 3 turnovers, or scored less that 10 points and won?

And you reply with:

Let's look directly at the QB of the Panthers that year.

2003 Carolina Panthers 16 15 449 266 59.2 3219 7.17 67 19 16 23/168 46 9 80.6

games played/ fumbles/ atts/ completions//comp.%/yards/ ypa/ lg/ TD'S/INT'S.

So as you can tell you have already been shown to be wrong about the Panthers, now I'm off to NFL.COM to prove you wrong on the Buc's.

Tobias' question is acutally four-pronged, so let's check your answers to see if they match up.

On how many games during their Superbowl run did the Panthers turn the ball 5 times?

I can see from your answer that Jake fumbled 15 times and threw 16 interceptions- that's 31 turnovers total....for Jake. Still hasn't answered the original question, but you were close. Out of 53 players, you managed to post the stats of one. 52 more to go.

or failed to convert less than 3 3rd downs

Don't see where you provided any information on this.

or failed to score points of 3 turnovers

Don't see where you provided any information on this.

or scored less that 10 points and won?

Don't see where you provided any information on this.

So as you can tell you have already been shown to be wrong about the Panthers

You do realize by posting something that doesn't answer the original question, reagardless of whether you roll the "You're Wrong" flag up the pole, people will rip right through it.

So far you've managed to provide everyone how many turnovers Jake had back in 2003. Congrats, I wasn't sure about the appoximate number, but had I been asked to take a guess, i would have been close. Outside of that, you have provided NOTHING in the way of an valid answer to the questions that were posed to you, even if you act like you've answered them....you haven't.

Actually B&B, that stat he posted on Jake is also a lie in that he fumbled 15 times, but most of them were recovered by the Panthers. I think he had only 5 lost out of the 15 fumbles, so 21 turnovers. Maybe 6 so 22. Brooks led the league in lost fumbles that year with 13. So not only did he not answet the questions, he is once again posting false stats to try and prove another ridiculous point.

BlackandBlue · 11-24-2005, 10:54 PM

A bone....I was tossing him a bone.

No you are gonna stop right there because I proved myself right and you wrong

Going to try this argument next time I get pulled over.

lynwood · 11-25-2005, 01:39 PM

Originally Posted by BlackonBlack

Actually B&B, that stat he posted on Jake is also a lie in that he fumbled 15 times, but most of them were recovered by the Panthers. I think he had only 5 lost out of the 15 fumbles, so 21 turnovers. Maybe 6 so 22. Brooks led the league in lost fumbles that year with 13. So not only did he not answet the questions, he is once again posting false stats to try and prove another ridiculous point.

Boy oh Boy, how ridiculous someone is made to look...Now 15 fumbles by Jake where some were recovered by the Panthers were actually to a certain individual, not really fumbles because his team members recovered some. Hhhmmmm?!!@#

Let me say this as sloooowwwlllyy as possible, if there really wasn't a fumble by Jake then why did the NFL count 15 fumbles against him? let your brain marinate on that for a second.

When someone fumbles the ball, loses yardage and the ball is recovered by regardless of whom, it's still a fumble and Jake led the NFL in total turnovers in 2003 PERIOD!!!!!

Next, B&B since you threw a bone and I bit, what was the point??? the fact is I proved that I was right, and your bone is still sitting there staring you in the face. Bow-wow...

Take your meds.You're losing it.

lynwood · 11-25-2005, 09:14 PM

You've been proven wrong time and time again in this forum. You only post Jake stats and say they are brooks, you say the defense should score for the offense. You ignore the many times the offense has given up turnovers. You don't understand that the playbook was simplified for
HIM. why would they do that? You asked for proof where sports writers were bashing brooks and were provided them and still don't believe them. I've made my argument which is the same as the majority in this forum. weather you want to believe it or not brooks sucks. So maybe you need meds to see clearly. Maybe watch brooks play a game and stop watching Jake.

lynwood · 11-26-2005, 04:39 PM

Stop being a little woman by arguing with emotions and not the facts.
Defense should only be concerned with takeaways. Scoring is a bonus. I doubt that you expect the nose tackle to run the field and score.

How bout when the defense does get a takeaway the offense manages to turn it into points? Bet that helps the TEAM out and probably fires up the defense more for doing their job getting the takaway.

Look I don't want to be reduced into name calling with you. But you like being in the minority with your opinions and you want to call people out then say they are in a "click". Wise up will you. Brooks may thrive on another team, we won't know until it happens. But here he is not doing it.

The Defense might thrive with some new LB's and coaching. Until that happens Craft does suck.

The offense needs to score more points. They admit not being able to get past the 40 yard line and score.
Not every defense we have played against is good but our offense makes them seem like pro bowlers.

You don't have to agree with any of that but you are in the minority. Be mad, spout college ball, and Jakes stats it won't help you.

11-24-2005, 07:44 PM	#31
Tobias-Reiper Merces Letifer Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 4,161	Originally Posted by BlackonBlack ... I'm going to stop right here, because you are just rambling now... it's past the amusing point, and now it is just sad... No you are gonna stop right there because I proved myself right and you wrong...There were several other games many more that were only 3) 3rd downs converted and as I said many others that were only 4) 3rd down conversions converted. And this team went to the Superbowl, you said find the games were they had 5 are more turnovers I did...And now you the little weasel sneaks off because you can't respond to the rest. .. no, dimwit... Find a game where their offense had 5 turnovers AND WON... Find a game where their offense failed to convert on 3rd downs AND WON ... for Pete's sake, stop it... seriously...
	'Cause the simple man pays the thrills, the bills and the pills that kill

11-24-2005, 10:32 PM	#32
saintswhodi 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: San Antonio, TX Posts: 6,941	Originally Posted by BlackandBlue Wait, wait, wait. Tobias asked you the following questions: On how many games during their Superbowl run did the Panthers turn the ball 5 times, or failed to convert less than 3 3rd downs, or failed to score points of 3 turnovers, or scored less that 10 points and won? And you reply with: Let's look directly at the QB of the Panthers that year. 2003 Carolina Panthers 16 15 449 266 59.2 3219 7.17 67 19 16 23/168 46 9 80.6 games played/ fumbles/ atts/ completions//comp.%/yards/ ypa/ lg/ TD'S/INT'S. So as you can tell you have already been shown to be wrong about the Panthers, now I'm off to NFL.COM to prove you wrong on the Buc's. Tobias' question is acutally four-pronged, so let's check your answers to see if they match up. On how many games during their Superbowl run did the Panthers turn the ball 5 times? I can see from your answer that Jake fumbled 15 times and threw 16 interceptions- that's 31 turnovers total....for Jake. Still hasn't answered the original question, but you were close. Out of 53 players, you managed to post the stats of one. 52 more to go. or failed to convert less than 3 3rd downs Don't see where you provided any information on this. or failed to score points of 3 turnovers Don't see where you provided any information on this. or scored less that 10 points and won? Don't see where you provided any information on this. So as you can tell you have already been shown to be wrong about the Panthers You do realize by posting something that doesn't answer the original question, reagardless of whether you roll the "You're Wrong" flag up the pole, people will rip right through it. So far you've managed to provide everyone how many turnovers Jake had back in 2003. Congrats, I wasn't sure about the appoximate number, but had I been asked to take a guess, i would have been close. Outside of that, you have provided NOTHING in the way of an valid answer to the questions that were posed to you, even if you act like you've answered them....you haven't. Actually B&B, that stat he posted on Jake is also a lie in that he fumbled 15 times, but most of them were recovered by the Panthers. I think he had only 5 lost out of the 15 fumbles, so 21 turnovers. Maybe 6 so 22. Brooks led the league in lost fumbles that year with 13. So not only did he not answet the questions, he is once again posting false stats to try and prove another ridiculous point.

11-24-2005, 10:54 PM	#33
BlackandBlue Kinder, gentler Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: dirty south Posts: 3,889	A bone....I was tossing him a bone. No you are gonna stop right there because I proved myself right and you wrong Going to try this argument next time I get pulled over.

11-25-2005, 01:39 PM	#34
lynwood 1000 Posts + Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Hockley, Tx Posts: 1,515	Originally Posted by BlackonBlack Actually B&B, that stat he posted on Jake is also a lie in that he fumbled 15 times, but most of them were recovered by the Panthers. I think he had only 5 lost out of the 15 fumbles, so 21 turnovers. Maybe 6 so 22. Brooks led the league in lost fumbles that year with 13. So not only did he not answet the questions, he is once again posting false stats to try and prove another ridiculous point. Boy oh Boy, how ridiculous someone is made to look...Now 15 fumbles by Jake where some were recovered by the Panthers were actually to a certain individual, not really fumbles because his team members recovered some. Hhhmmmm?!!@# Let me say this as sloooowwwlllyy as possible, if there really wasn't a fumble by Jake then why did the NFL count 15 fumbles against him? let your brain marinate on that for a second. When someone fumbles the ball, loses yardage and the ball is recovered by regardless of whom, it's still a fumble and Jake led the NFL in total turnovers in 2003 PERIOD!!!!! Next, B&B since you threw a bone and I bit, what was the point??? the fact is I proved that I was right, and your bone is still sitting there staring you in the face. Bow-wow... Take your meds.You're losing it.

Latest Blogs
2023 New Orleans Saints: Training Camp Last Blog: 08-01-2023 By: MarchingOn Puck the Fro Browl! Last Blog: 02-05-2023 By: neugey CFP: "Just Keep Doing What You're Doing" Last Blog: 12-08-2022 By: neugey

11-25-2005, 09:14 PM	#35
lynwood 1000 Posts + Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Hockley, Tx Posts: 1,515	You've been proven wrong time and time again in this forum. You only post Jake stats and say they are brooks, you say the defense should score for the offense. You ignore the many times the offense has given up turnovers. You don't understand that the playbook was simplified for HIM. why would they do that? You asked for proof where sports writers were bashing brooks and were provided them and still don't believe them. I've made my argument which is the same as the majority in this forum. weather you want to believe it or not brooks sucks. So maybe you need meds to see clearly. Maybe watch brooks play a game and stop watching Jake.

11-26-2005, 04:39 PM	#36
lynwood 1000 Posts + Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Hockley, Tx Posts: 1,515	Stop being a little woman by arguing with emotions and not the facts. Defense should only be concerned with takeaways. Scoring is a bonus. I doubt that you expect the nose tackle to run the field and score. How bout when the defense does get a takeaway the offense manages to turn it into points? Bet that helps the TEAM out and probably fires up the defense more for doing their job getting the takaway. Look I don't want to be reduced into name calling with you. But you like being in the minority with your opinions and you want to call people out then say they are in a "click". Wise up will you. Brooks may thrive on another team, we won't know until it happens. But here he is not doing it. The Defense might thrive with some new LB's and coaching. Until that happens Craft does suck. The offense needs to score more points. They admit not being able to get past the 40 yard line and score. Not every defense we have played against is good but our offense makes them seem like pro bowlers. You don't have to agree with any of that but you are in the minority. Be mad, spout college ball, and Jakes stats it won't help you.