PDA

View Full Version : It wasn't me....


UltimateFootballNetwork
09-02-2009, 04:34 PM
I did not write this so please start insulting and flaming the author as appropriate.

http://www.postgameheroes.com/?p=7540 (http://www.postgameheroes.com/?p=7540)

The_WARDen
09-02-2009, 04:38 PM
I'm ready!

:popcorn:

Sharkissle29
09-02-2009, 04:38 PM
:coffee:

tony hipchest
09-02-2009, 04:39 PM
if not you, then who?

tim lumber?

:chuckle:

anyways... steelers are lucky. i'd take our stable of backs over any others.

Mags87
09-02-2009, 04:55 PM
if not you, then who?

tim lumber?

:chuckle:

anyways... steelers are lucky. i'd take our stable of backs over any others.

i love my Steelers but what about Minnesota with Peterson/Taylor? or San Diego with LT/Sproles?

Preacher
09-02-2009, 04:59 PM
I did not write this so please start insulting and flaming the author as appropriate.

http://www.postgameheroes.com/?p=7540 (http://www.postgameheroes.com/?p=7540)


:rofl: but you sure had to post it here right!!!

StainlessStill
09-02-2009, 05:10 PM
I didn't bother reading most of the article, but there is no doubt in my mind that Moore is WAY underrated, and deserves more credit than meets the eye. I said multiple times last year that M.M's style of running sometimes out shadow's that of Willie's. He's smart, decisive, quick witted, and more importantly, patient between the tackles. He has a knack of finding the North end of the field and is always leaning forward. I like Mewelde, we'd be a much better team if he was involved more. A great back and football player as a whole. I'm glad we have him.

thesteelersreport.com
09-02-2009, 05:21 PM
I didn't bother reading most of the article, but there is no doubt in my mind that Moore is WAY underrated, and deserves more credit than meets the eye. .


I concur. Moore has great hands and the experience of a seasoned veteran. He could be a sleeper again this year - although Mendenhall had some nice runs against the Bills (as well as that fumble).....

tony hipchest
09-02-2009, 05:28 PM
i love my Steelers but what about Minnesota with Peterson/Taylor? or San Diego with LT/Sproles?
or carolina's duo.

i would maybe trade our 3 for minnesota's peterson straight up (even w/o taylor)... other than that, i think i take our 3-5 over any other teams 3-5 (considering we may have summers, redman, or logan in the mix).

Fire Haley
09-02-2009, 05:30 PM
ha ha!

Where's ol Sleestak now?


Mewelde Moore might be Steelers’ best RB

Preacher
09-02-2009, 05:31 PM
I didn't bother reading most of the article, but there is no doubt in my mind that Moore is WAY underrated, and deserves more credit than meets the eye. I said multiple times last year that M.M's style of running sometimes out shadow's that of Willie's. He's smart, decisive, quick witted, and more importantly, patient between the tackles. He has a knack of finding the North end of the field and is always leaning forward. I like Mewelde, we'd be a much better team if he was involved more. A great back and football player as a whole. I'm glad we have him.

I think everyone on this board would agree with that. I know I sure do.

UltimateFootballNetwork
09-02-2009, 06:11 PM
I think everyone on this board would agree with that. I know I sure do.
Holy moly.

That's not what I've come across

Preacher
09-02-2009, 06:30 PM
Holy moly.

That's not what I've come across


No, that is EXACTLY what you have come across.

What you HAVEN'T come across is people agreeing is the the best back on the team.

No one doubts his ability. They doubt that his ability is greater than Willie for the duration of the year.

Psyychoward86
09-02-2009, 06:38 PM
That was one bold article, and while i dont believe it, i do believe that he really is underappreciated and highly underrated. All that matters is that we have the stable of runningbacks that we have right now. No matter who starts, i feel good about what we've got back there.

steelreserve
09-02-2009, 06:40 PM
No one doubts his ability. They doubt that his ability is greater than Willie for the duration of the year.

Yeah, but ... Willie doesn't play for the duration of the year anymore either.

UltimateFootballNetwork
09-02-2009, 06:43 PM
No, that is EXACTLY what you have come across.

What you HAVEN'T come across is people agreeing is the the best back on the team.

No one doubts his ability. They doubt that his ability is greater than Willie for the duration of the year. Ummmmm, ok.

I think the article suggested that Moore might be the best back on the team and through a page full of responses no one has yet to disagree.

And yeah, I'm pretty sure that the quote you agreed with said...

I like Mewelde, we'd be a much better team if he was involved more. A great back and football player as a whole.


....which has been exactly what I've been ripped for saying. The consensus on this forum has been clear that Moore is "only a 3rd down back" and that Parker and Mendenhall will take all of the primary carries.

Any suggestion that Moore takes on a role beyond 3rd down back has not been supported by anyone on this board other than myself.

UltimateFootballNetwork
09-02-2009, 06:45 PM
Yeah, but ... Willie doesn't play for the duration of the year anymore either.
I guess I don't get it because both the article as well as the statistics I have provided have suggested that, yes, Moore is more effective over any time period you might suggest.

I still see very little disagreement with that premise in this thread.

Preacher
09-02-2009, 06:47 PM
Ummmmm, ok.

I think the article suggested that Moore might be the best back on the team and through a page full of responses no one has yet to disagree.

And yeah, I'm pretty sure that the quote you agreed with said...



....which has been exactly what I've been ripped for saying. The consensus on this forum has been clear that Moore is "only a 3rd down back" and that Parker and Mendenhall will take all of the primary carries.

Any suggestion that Moore takes on a role beyond 3rd down back has not been supported by anyone on this board other than myself.

No, you have been ripped for saying that he was a BETTER back than Parker... based on cherry picked stats.

If I really cared enough about this topic anymore, I could go back and show you quotes from Fansince, Xterm, Myself, and others who ALL said that they wanted to see MeMo get more touches...that he deserved more touches.

Preacher
09-02-2009, 06:47 PM
Yeah, but ... Willie doesn't play for the duration of the year anymore either.

So that means that the staff DOES share carries right? :chuckle:

:poke:

:wink02:

UltimateFootballNetwork
09-02-2009, 06:53 PM
No, you have been ripped for saying that he was a BETTER back than Parker... based on cherry picked stats.

If I really cared enough about this topic anymore, I could go back and show you quotes from Fansince, Xterm, Myself, and others who ALL said that they wanted to see MeMo get more touches...that he deserved more touches.

Maybe I'm taking crazy pills, but I'm wondering who disagrees with an article with the title Mewelde Moore might be Steelers’ best RB which is then backed up by a number of stats.

You are telling me that you are in agreement with the article but yes you still meant it when you ripped me for suggesting the same thing.

So I'm confused as to what you think.

El-Gonzo Jackson
09-02-2009, 06:55 PM
Depth is:
Parker
Mendenhall
Moore
Summers or Redman

:yawn:

UltimateFootballNetwork
09-02-2009, 06:57 PM
:yawn: Well, as long as you back up your take so convincingly...

Preacher
09-02-2009, 07:05 PM
Maybe I'm taking crazy pills, but I'm wondering who disagrees with an article with the title Mewelde Moore might be Steelers’ best RB which is then backed up by a number of stats.

You are telling me that you are in agreement with the article but yes you still meant it when you ripped me for suggesting the same thing.

So I'm confused as to what you think.


Figures... Do you notice that I was referencing SOMEONE ELSES POST.. .NOT THE ARTICLE?

I never said I was in agreement with the article. I said I was in agreement with Stainlesstil's post which was...

I didn't bother reading most of the article, but there is no doubt in my mind that Moore is WAY underrated, and deserves more credit than meets the eye. I said multiple times last year that M.M's style of running sometimes out shadow's that of Willie's. He's smart, decisive, quick witted, and more importantly, patient between the tackles. He has a knack of finding the North end of the field and is always leaning forward. I like Mewelde, we'd be a much better team if he was involved more. A great back and football player as a whole. I'm glad we have him.

I said nothing about agreeing that MeMo is the best back on the team, nor that anyone else here would agree with that. Only that everyone else here would probably agree that MeMo was underrated and deserved more touches...

Preacher
09-02-2009, 07:07 PM
I guess the REAL question is...

Why did you have to come in here and start yet ANOTHER WILLIE SUCKS THREAD...

Couldn't you find one of a thousand others?



--is there anyway to beg the mods to just merge this to one of the other UFN Willie Sucks threads?

I can offer rep points... :chuckle:

UltimateFootballNetwork
09-02-2009, 07:11 PM
I guess the REAL question is...

Why did you have to come in here and start yet ANOTHER WILLIE SUCKS THREAD...

Couldn't you find one of a thousand others?



--is there anyway to beg the mods to just merge this to one of the other UFN Willie Sucks threads?

I can offer rep points... :chuckle: I stand corrected. I see what you agreed with but can't help but notice that I still don't see the violent disagreement with the article that is now being directed at me nor do I see anyone arguing the, ahem, facts put forth.

This is not a "Willie Sucks" thread because this is a "here's someone else who thinks that Moore might be the best back" thread. Being pro something does not mean being con the other thing.

I put forth the article and don't see any real disagreement except at the semantic level. Uh huh.

Preacher
09-02-2009, 07:16 PM
I stand corrected. I see what you agreed with but can't help but notice that I still don't see the violent disagreement with the article that is now being directed at me nor do I see anyone arguing the, ahem, facts put forth.

This is not a "Willie Sucks" thread because this is a "here's someone else who thinks that Moore might be the best back" thread. Being pro something does not mean being con the other thing.

I put forth the article and don't see any real disagreement except at the semantic level. Uh huh.

Because he is rehashing the same stuff... which we have rehashed here for a year. And it is just as disagreed with. Maybe there is a lesson in there for you.

If you argue something long enough and hard enough... it isn't that you win, its that others will simply turn a deaf ear to you and the subject.. and while I can't speak for anyone else, I have a feeling that is about where a lot of people are concerning you and this subject.

El-Gonzo Jackson
09-02-2009, 07:33 PM
Well, as long as you back up your take so convincingly...

Come back next thursday and see if I was wrong. :wave:

wootawnee
09-02-2009, 07:44 PM
I didn't bother reading most of the article, but there is no doubt in my mind that Moore is WAY underrated, and deserves more credit than meets the eye. I said multiple times last year that M.M's style of running sometimes out shadow's that of Willie's. He's smart, decisive, quick witted, and more importantly, patient between the tackles. He has a knack of finding the North end of the field and is always leaning forward. I like Mewelde, we'd be a much better team if he was involved more. A great back and football player as a whole. I'm glad we have him.

Ditto

NJarhead
09-02-2009, 07:46 PM
Was that The Onion?

wootawnee
09-02-2009, 08:02 PM
I know dude.......You guys are making this a conflict of interest post....Instead of a cool M M post.......Give it a break and argue off camera.......Big ups to M&M.......

M&M has a great presence that Parker does not....Parker gets mad.....All the time.....M&M 's attitude is like Walter Payton's, Barry Sanders', Franco Harris',Tony Dorsett's.....He got class....Class is the word my brothers and sisters.......I will take class over mad,angry,me,me,me Willie all day......Cause that class puts the team first every second of existence and is aware every moment.....Whereas mad,angry,me,me,me, is not aware...it is greedy and self centered.......And lets the team down because of its own issues...........Unless your Jack Lambert.....Than you can be pissed and angry as you want to a degree.......But the otherside of the ball is a different cookie......Big ups M>M>..........

steelreserve
09-02-2009, 08:04 PM
my sister says Moore's dick is twice as big as Parker's.

:jawdrop:

devilsdancefloor
09-02-2009, 08:41 PM
UFN every time you come you want to fight about our RB's it is like me going to a redskins site and stating betts is way better if no the best RB on your team. It is like you thrive on this conflict. :noidea::noidea: Can you come here and discuss other matters or do you just come here and push buttons about willie??? I agree he has some sweet hands coming out of the back field, BUT he is a third down back he better have those hands to keep his job. But all this has been argued with you before on many many many to damn many other threads about this very subject. every time you are here it is like this... or at least i get that feeling


http://i28.tinypic.com/2rfdbio.jpg

UltimateFootballNetwork
09-02-2009, 10:10 PM
Because he is rehashing the same stuff... which we have rehashed here for a year. And it is just as disagreed with. Maybe there is a lesson in there for you.

If you argue something long enough and hard enough... it isn't that you win, its that others will simply turn a deaf ear to you and the subject.. and while I can't speak for anyone else, I have a feeling that is about where a lot of people are concerning you and this subject. And you've made your disagreement clear. You've suggested that I have "cherry picked" facts and, I assume, you are suggesting that the author of the article has done the same.

I've asked many times for a counter argument or facts that contradict the "cherry picked" facts and yet none come out.

There is a difference between disagreeing and being wrong.

UltimateFootballNetwork
09-02-2009, 10:19 PM
UFN every time you come you want to fight about our RB's it is like me going to a redskins site and stating betts is way better if no the best RB on your team. It is like you thrive on this conflict. :noidea::noidea: Can you come here and discuss other matters or do you just come here and push buttons about willie??? I agree he has some sweet hands coming out of the back field, BUT he is a third down back he better have those hands to keep his job. But all this has been argued with you before on many many many to damn many other threads about this very subject. every time you are here it is like this... or at least i get that feeling

No it's not like that. It would be like that if you came with a fact-based argument that Betts was better than Portis but you cannot find any facts to back up that statement. If you have any I would very much welcome the discussion and the opportunity to learn about ways my favorite team might get better and even moreso if it could get us to the Super Bowl. Fan discussion sometimes means recognizing that your favorite players are flawed, aging, human beings.

I have been very clear that I want to understand why neither fans nor coaches seem to see that Parker's ineffective running (for whatever reason) was hurting the offense last year. I've asked anyone to present me the counter argument and I've gotten nothing but insults and "because Parker is just better" type of arguments.

A Steeler blogger made the exact same fact based argument that I've made. That's all. I still see no counter argument that isn't "rah-rah" "Parker's the best forever!!".

Last time I checked, the Steelers running game was the last piece to a potential dynasty, so its of interest to me as a fan of the NFL.

tony hipchest
09-02-2009, 10:31 PM
Ummmmm, ok.

I think the article suggested that Moore might be the best back on the team and through a page full of responses no one has yet to disagree.

And yeah, I'm pretty sure that the quote you agreed with said...


.

:yeehaw:

woah.... hold everything there, hoss!

i would take willie parker or mendenhall as my starter (over moore) any day.

you might as well go try telling bill belichick he woulda been better off starting kevin faulk for the past 10 years. :busted:

just to be clear.... moore hasnt yet topped k. faulk status as a 3rd down back, yet you are proclaiming him with the likes of l. johnson, LT, Jerome, AP, etc...

UltimateFootballNetwork
09-02-2009, 11:34 PM
:yeehaw:

woah.... hold everything there, hoss!

i would take willie parker or mendenhall as my starter (over moore) any day.

you might as well go try telling bill belichick he woulda been better off starting kevin faulk for the past 10 years. :busted:

just to be clear.... moore hasnt yet topped k. faulk status as a 3rd down back, yet you are proclaiming him with the likes of l. johnson, LT, Jerome, AP, etc... OK, now we are back to where we started.

For starters, at no point have I said that Moore is anything like LT, AP, Bettis or any of those other backs, so don't make things up.

As a "3rd down back" comparison, Moore has a much higher YPC, YPR, far fewer fumbles and is a better blocker than Kevin Faulk.

But that's not what we are talking about here. It's one thing that fans are so enamored with Willie Parker that they would prefer him to Moore "any day". But Mendenhall? Really? Interesting.....

I would ask that you back up your statement by refuting some of the points in the article.

sherlock
09-02-2009, 11:57 PM
I love Willie,Mewelde.Mendy and whoever else plays in the B&G....so long as they give their best.
I don`t know why you`re so hung up on this subject UFN:noidea:

fansince'76
09-03-2009, 12:02 AM
I know dude.......You guys are making this a conflict of interest post....Instead of a cool M M post.......Give it a break and argue off camera.......Big ups to M&M.......

M&M has a great presence that Parker does not....Parker gets mad.....All the time.....M&M 's attitude is like Walter Payton's, Barry Sanders', Franco Harris',Tony Dorsett's.....He got class....Class is the word my brothers and sisters.......I will take class over mad,angry,me,me,me Willie all day......Cause that class puts the team first every second of existence and is aware every moment.....Whereas mad,angry,me,me,me, is not aware...it is greedy and self centered.......And lets the team down because of its own issues...........Unless your Jack Lambert.....Than you can be pissed and angry as you want to a degree.......But the otherside of the ball is a different cookie......Big ups M>M>..........

Huh? :noidea:

Preacher
09-03-2009, 12:05 AM
I love Willie,Mewelde.Mendy and whoever else plays in the B&G....so long as they give their best.
I don`t know why you`re so hung up on this subject UFN:noidea:

:rofl:

Bwahahahahaha

The limey has it, dear sir!

X-Terminator
09-03-2009, 12:29 AM
I love Willie,Mewelde.Mendy and whoever else plays in the B&G....so long as they give their best.
I don`t know why you`re so hung up on this subject UFN:noidea:

Moore went to the same college he allegedly did (Tulane University in New Orleans)...and that's pretty much it. Support the boys from your alma mater, and all that rot.

Anyway UFN, I'm in a non-confrontational mood tonight (hey, it's a full moon - it has strange effects on people), so I'll simply say this: Mewelde Moore is the most versatile back on the team. Not the best. He does a lot of things well, but doesn't excel at any one thing, which is fine - you can still be productive with those characteristics. I absolutely agree he should be more involved in the game plan given his versatility - I would say 10-12 touches per game rushing and receiving. I would love it if the Steelers used their 3 backs the way the Giants used Jacobs, Ward and Bradshaw, and really make it tough for opposing defenses to stop them since their passing attack should be as dangerous as anyone in the league. I'd say give Parker 20 carries, Mendenhall 10-15 touches and Moore 10-12 touches. I think that would be within reason and would still allow them to pass 25+ times per game.

Huh? :noidea:

I couldn't quite figure out what that gibberish was either. Something about Parker being selfish, which of course is ridiculous.

ricksteelers55
09-03-2009, 01:01 AM
I dont freakin care who the starting back is i want us to improve our running game,and im sure we will

MACH1
09-03-2009, 01:43 AM
I know dude.......You guys are making this a conflict of interest post....Instead of a cool M M post.......Give it a break and argue off camera.......Big ups to M&M.......

M&M has a great presence that Parker does not....Parker gets mad.....All the time.....M&M 's attitude is like Walter Payton's, Barry Sanders', Franco Harris',Tony Dorsett's.....He got class....Class is the word my brothers and sisters.......I will take class over mad,angry,me,me,me Willie all day......Cause that class puts the team first every second of existence and is aware every moment.....Whereas mad,angry,me,me,me, is not aware...it is greedy and self centered.......And lets the team down because of its own issues...........Unless your Jack Lambert.....Than you can be pissed and angry as you want to a degree.......But the otherside of the ball is a different cookie......Big ups M>M>..........


:alcohol::alcoholic

sharkweek
09-03-2009, 04:10 AM
i love my Steelers but what about Minnesota with Peterson/Taylor? or San Diego with LT/Sproles?

I'd rather have their OLs than their RBs.

Peterson/Taylor is a killer combo though that I would definitely consider trading Parker/Mendenhall for. As far as the Chargers' RBs... LT is getting too old and I have a feeling Sproles might have been just a one hit wonder. The Chargers really had it made when Michael Turner was backing up LT, but now definitely not so much.

lamberts-lost-tooth
09-03-2009, 05:36 AM
And you've made your disagreement clear. You've suggested that I have "cherry picked" facts and, I assume, you are suggesting that the author of the article has done the same.

I've asked many times for a counter argument or facts that contradict the "cherry picked" facts and yet none come out.

There is a difference between disagreeing and being wrong.

That is a flat out lie...you have been given facts over and over yet you have selective memory in regards to any stat that doesnt support your "Moore for President" obsession.

By "Cherry-picked" facts we mean that you want to use the 2008 season as the end-all litmus test for who is the better RB.
In a myopic world...yes...Moore would appear to be better BUT you can't take one injury riddled season to judge WP.

Lets look again at the previous three years...2005-2007.

2005:
Parker:.....1,202 rushing yards....281 recieving yards... and a 4.7 ypc average. (1,484 Total yards)
Moore:.........662 rushing yards....339 recieving yards....and a 4.3 ypc average. (1001 Total yards)

2006:
Parker:......1,494 rushing yards.....222 recieving yards... and a 4.4 ypc average. (1616 Total yards)
Moore:...........131 rushing yards....468 recieving yards....and a 5.5 ypc average. (599 Total yards)

2007
Parker......1,316 rushing yards.....164 recieving yards....and a 4.1 ypc average. (1,480 Total yards)
Moore..........113 rushing yards.......48 recieving yards....and a 4.2 ypc average. (161 Total yards)

Now...even though the NUMBERS would support the fact that Willie is far and away the more productive of the two backs, lets look at the other problem with your thinking.

Moore has been in the league for several years now and has yet to win a starting position...are you trying to suggest that you have some insight that goes beyond what the Offensive Coordinators and Head Coaches of TWO DIFFERENT TEAMS have???

Do you think that you have figured out something through espn highlights that the coaches, who watch every play...every practice....have somehow MISSED????

Do you know how I will be certain that Moore is a better RB than Wille?

It will be the day that Tomlin says. "Moore is my starter...he is better than Willie"

Unlike some I dont presume to be more of an expert than THOSE WHO DO THIS FOR A LIVING... AT A LEVEL THAT WINS CHAMPIONSHIPS.

HometownGal
09-03-2009, 05:46 AM
http://images2.wikia.nocookie.net/muppet/images/7/74/Mortimersnerd.jpg


That is all.

mmalone
09-03-2009, 08:57 AM
OK, now we are back to where we started.

For starters, at no point have I said that Moore is anything like LT, AP, Bettis or any of those other backs, so don't make things up.

As a "3rd down back" comparison, Moore has a much higher YPC, YPR, far fewer fumbles and is a better blocker than Kevin Faulk.

But that's not what we are talking about here. It's one thing that fans are so enamored with Willie Parker that they would prefer him to Moore "any day". But Mendenhall? Really? Interesting.....

I would ask that you back up your statement by refuting some of the points in the article.

All of you should just sit back and enjoy Willie Running and Arians planning his attack.. It wil be the last year for Willie in B&G, so just let em play.

The_WARDen
09-03-2009, 09:57 AM
One thing I'll never understand is why people feel the need to argue over and over again with someone that has a different viewpoint. So much so, that they go round and round and round and present the same points and counterpoints over and over.

Nothing ever gets resolved so can't you ever just agree to disagree?

My grandfather was like that...he'd argue over the same thing every day practically.

:noidea:

Nadroj 20
09-03-2009, 10:02 AM
I'd rather have their OLs than their RBs.

Peterson/Taylor is a killer combo though that I would definitely consider trading Parker/Mendenhall for. As far as the Chargers' RBs... LT is getting too old and I have a feeling Sproles might have been just a one hit wonder. The Chargers really had it made when Michael Turner was backing up LT, but now definitely not so much.

You would conisder trading parker/mendy for peterson/taylor??? Lol i love parker and mendy but come on if we had that chance i wouldnt even consider it it would be a done deal ASAP lol

X-Terminator
09-03-2009, 11:09 AM
One thing I'll never understand is why people feel the need to argue over and over again with someone that has a different viewpoint. So much so, that they go round and round and round and present the same points and counterpoints over and over.

Nothing ever gets resolved so can't you ever just agree to disagree?

My grandfather was like that...he'd argue over the same thing every day practically.

:noidea:

Point taken. Most often, I just like busting UFN's chops and reminding him of how much of a tool he was last year with his one-man Moore circle-jerk and anti-Parker rants, incorrectly predicting that he would cost them the Super Bowl.

43Hitman
09-03-2009, 11:29 AM
No, that is EXACTLY what you have come across.

What you HAVEN'T come across is people agreeing is the the best back on the team.

No one doubts his ability. They doubt that his ability is greater than Willie for the duration of the year.

Ding ding ding! :applaudit:

El-Gonzo Jackson
09-03-2009, 11:34 AM
his one-man Moore circle-jerk and anti-Parker rants, incorrectly predicting that he would cost them the Super Bowl.

:rofl: as crude of a comment as that is........its just funny. :toofunny:

revefsreleets
09-03-2009, 01:15 PM
I think Moore is a fine back...if utilized correctly and used in the right situations.

Here's one problem with comparing these two backs. Moore has had a TOTAL of 404 carries in his entire NFL career. Parker had nearly that many just in 2006 (317). I also looked up Moore's injury report, and the dude is probably injury prone himself. He's only played sparingly over the years, but has been on injury reports 11 times over his career, for ankle, knee, wrist, shoulder and quad injuries. IF this kid carried the ball as much as Parker (1155 carries so far), he'd probably break in half.

I could also make the salient point that ANY back with pass catching abilities could put up Moore's numbers simply because of the way a pass catching back opens up the game. Parker has put a LOT of work into catching the ball, and if that ability comes to the forefront this year, I'd expect to see significant statistical improvements across the board from Willie. As someone in the comments section correctly pointed out, it's statistically impossible to DISPROVE the assertion that ANY pass catching back would put up better numbers than Willie.

I finally want to clarify that I am NOT anti-Mewelde Moore. I think he's a solid back when used properly, and we're lucky to have him. What I'm trying to do is bring balance to the thread starters concurrent obvious anti-Willie and delusional pro-Moore stance.

UltimateFootballNetwork
09-03-2009, 02:32 PM
That is a flat out lie...you have been given facts over and over yet you have selective memory in regards to any stat that doesnt support your "Moore for President" obsession.

By "Cherry-picked" facts we mean that you want to use the 2008 season as the end-all litmus test for who is the better RB.
In a myopic world...yes...Moore would appear to be better BUT you can't take one injury riddled season to judge WP.


Whoa. Stop there. Do not pass go. Do not collect $200. No one said anything about "better" in the context of a career.

The point in question is, was and has been that the 2008 Steelers were a better offense with Moore rather than Parker. That's all that was said, the rest is irrelvant.

The question was why was Moore not a part of the gameplan down the stretch and in the playoffs when, as you would concede, he was the more effective back? That's all. Nothing more. It was a legit question then, now and will be until a logical answer appears.

Do you know how I will be certain that Moore is a better RB than Wille?

It will be the day that Tomlin says. "Moore is my starter...he is better than Willie"

Unlike some I dont presume to be more of an expert than THOSE WHO DO THIS FOR A LIVING... AT A LEVEL THAT WINS CHAMPIONSHIPS.

You are more than welcome to not question decisions that make no sense, but that's how we ended up in Iraq. Willie Parkers college coach didn't use him at all....should that decision have been questioned? Franco Harris didn't start in college. Does that mean you should never question Joe Paterno in hindsight?

UltimateFootballNetwork
09-03-2009, 02:47 PM
Point taken. Most often, I just like busting UFN's chops and reminding him of how much of a tool he was last year with his one-man Moore circle-jerk and anti-Parker rants, incorrectly predicting that he would cost them the Super Bowl. The fact that you are so concerned about me and my circle-jerks is nothing short of a compliment as far as I'm concerned and your classy discourse is so refreshing.

And since you did enough research on me to provide the link, you should have no problem acknowledging that I predicted no such thing. I asked a rhetorical question which is far from making a prediction.

But any sober analysis would prove that if I had predicted as much, I would have been incredibly close to calling it on the nose.

The Steelers had the lead in the 2nd half of the Super Bowl and COULD NOT RUN OUT THE CLOCK. Parker had 11 carries for a pitiful 19 yards (including a 15 yard run) and the Steelers had ONE rushing 1st down in the 2nd half.

Unable to control the ball or the clock, Kurt Warner got another shot and put the Cardinals up late in the game.

So if it weren't for a HOF QB and the no-huddle package (which, ahem, had FWP standing on the sidelines), yes the lack of running game would have absolutely cost the Steelers a Super Bowl. So it's too bad I did not predict as much, as it would have been an awfully smart thing to predict.

fansince'76
09-03-2009, 02:50 PM
Unable to control the ball or the clock, Kurt Warner got another shot and put the Cardinals up late in the game.

Yeah, that had nothing to do with Hartwig incurring a holding call in the end zone giving the Cardinals two free points and possession of the ball, not to mention nullifying a catch by Holmes at the 20 yard line which would have given the Steelers 1st and ten with just over 3 minutes left in the game. :coffee:

lamberts-lost-tooth
09-03-2009, 03:04 PM
Whoa. Stop there. Do not pass go. Do not collect $200. No one said anything about "better" in the context of a career.

The point in question is, was and has been that the 2008 Steelers were a better offense with Moore rather than Parker. That's all that was said, the rest is irrelvant.

The question was why was Moore not a part of the gameplan down the stretch and in the playoffs when, as you would concede, he was the more effective back? That's all. Nothing more. It was a legit question then, now and will be until a logical answer appears.





Well unfortunetaly for you ...In 2009 the 05-07 stats are just as relevent as the stats from 2008. Other wise...you ARE cherry picking stats. The FO doesnt have that option and will play the BETTER back...period. They are NOT going to ignore past stats and only use Willies season with the injury. No one would.


You are more than welcome to not question decisions that make no sense, but that's how we ended up in Iraq. Willie Parkers college coach didn't use him at all....should that decision have been questioned? Franco Harris didn't start in college. Does that mean you should never question Joe Paterno in hindsight?

These decisions "dont make sense" to YOU...because you choose to stick your fingers in your ears and close your eyes to the bigger picture in regards to picking starters. Hey...question away...we all do it. But your broken record in regards to this one subject hints at more than just questioning..it hints of obsessive arrogance and disrespect of the Steelers coaching staff.
You just find it hard it imagine they may know more than you and your piss-poor substitute for an actual legitimate arguement.

By the way ..We are almost up to 60 posts in this thread...Isnt it about time to open a new thread start the same conversation?

UltimateFootballNetwork
09-03-2009, 03:07 PM
Yeah, that had nothing to do with Hartwig incurring a holding call in the end zone giving the Cardinals two free points and possession of the ball, not to mention nullifying a catch by Holmes at the 20 yard line which would have given the Steelers 1st and ten with just over 3 minutes left in the game. :coffee:

Does that change the fact that the Steelers couldn't run the ball with a lead in the Super Bowl? 11 carries for 19 yards is not getting it done.

UltimateFootballNetwork
09-03-2009, 03:09 PM
Well unfortunetaly for you ...In 2009 the 05-07 stats are just as relevent as the stats from 2008. Other wise...you ARE cherry picking stats. The FO doesnt have that option and will play the BETTER back...period. They are NOT going to ignore past stats and only use Willies season with the injury. No one would.




These decisions "dont make sense" to YOU...because you choose to stick your fingers in your ears and close your eyes to the bigger picture in regards to picking starters. Hey...question away...we all do it. But your broken record in regards to this one subject hints at more than just questioning..it hints of obsessive arrogance and disrespect of the Steelers coaching staff.
You just find it hard it imagine they may know more than you and your piss-poor substitute for an actual legitimate arguement.

By the way ..We are almost up to 60 posts in this thread...Isnt it about time to open a new thread start the same conversation? I don't understand why you keep changing the topic....

Who said anything about 2009? And you call my argument "piss poor" yet you have agreed with my argument. :noidea:

lamberts-lost-tooth
09-03-2009, 03:09 PM
Does that change the fact that the Steelers couldn't run the ball with a lead in the Super Bowl? 11 carries for 19 yards is not getting it done.

Its also not "Losing the Super Bowl"...You were wrong...move on.

UltimateFootballNetwork
09-03-2009, 03:13 PM
Its also not "Losing the Super Bowl"...You were wrong...move on.:noidea: huh? What was I wrong about?

lamberts-lost-tooth
09-03-2009, 03:18 PM
I don't understand why you keep changing the topic....

Who said anything about 2009? And you call my argument "piss poor" yet you have agreed with my argument. :noidea:

Seriously...you need medical help.

I am in no way agreeing with your argument...Please try and keep up.

This is why people think you are a tool who knows little about football.

You use scattered facts to make a weak point...then you demand facts to disprove your point....then when facts are given...you choose to ignore those facts and fall back on your scattered stats....then you show up a week later and claim noone has ever given you any facts...over and over and over.

Weak...pathetic...and getting very old.

Seriuosly...answer this question for me. How many threads do you believe you have brought up this conversation in now? 10?....20?....30?

At what point do you just give it up? Your like a Ham salesmen outside a Synagogue, at SOME point you would think you would realize that noone is buying it!!!

lamberts-lost-tooth
09-03-2009, 03:28 PM
:noidea: huh? What was I wrong about?

Or you dense or do you have short term memory loss?

El-Gonzo Jackson
09-03-2009, 03:32 PM
:noidea: huh? What was I wrong about?

I think this is what Lambertslost tooth is referring to.

I remain intrigued by the fact that the Steelers may cost themselves a Super Bowl seemingly out of loyalty to a player.
http://forums.steelersfever.com/showthread.php?t=32771&page=2

Fact is that the Steelers didnt cost themselves a Super Bowl out of loyalty to a player. But you repeatedly have lost any credibility here out of loyalty to a RB from your alma mater.

lamberts-lost-tooth
09-03-2009, 03:35 PM
I think this is what Lambertslost tooth is referring to.

I remain intrigued by the fact that the Steelers may cost themselves a Super Bowl seemingly out of loyalty to a player.
http://forums.steelersfever.com/showthread.php?t=32771&page=2

Fact is that the Steelers didnt cost themselves a Super Bowl out of loyalty to a player. But you repeatedly have lost any credibility here out of loyalty to a RB from your alma mater.

I think he knows exactly what I was talking about...but this "dense" act allows him to deflect criticism.

Much like how he is now playing the victim and has been misunderstood. Pretending that he never implied that Moore was the "better back. Asking for Stats then ignoring any stats that dont fit his myopic argument..then pretending that no one ever gives him stats.

Its a one pony show...nothing more.

UltimateFootballNetwork
09-03-2009, 04:04 PM
I think he knows exactly what I was talking about...but this "dense" act allows him to deflect criticism.

Much like how he is now playing the victim and has been misunderstood. Pretending that he never implied that Moore was the "better back. Asking for Stats then ignoring any stats that dont fit his myopic argument..then pretending that no one ever gives him stats.

Its a one pony show...nothing more. Wow.

The quote which you provide says "may" which is not at all the same thing as "will".

And given that the Steelers did stick with a RB who was 11 carries for 19 yards, the question seems like a perfectly logical question to ask. I think you would be hard pressed to suggest that the lack of a run game didn't cost the Steelers the lead in the Super Bowl, even though Big Ben and Santonio Holmes pulled it out in the end.

And yes, LLT, you agreed that by any statistic you want to point to the 08 Steelers offense was better with Moore...

In a myopic world...yes...Moore would appear to be better BUT you can't take one injury riddled season to judge WP.

Let's ask the same question another way and see if you can help me with it....

FWP is one of the greatest RBs of all time and a sure fire Hall-of-Famer. But in 2008, through a combination of injuries, poor playcalling, crappy OL play and some bad luck, the Steelers offense for some reason worked better with their mediocre 3rd down back in the backfield.

Why didn't the Steelers use their inferior 3rd down back when that personnel package was more effective?

devilsdancefloor
09-03-2009, 04:29 PM
LLT found the reason why the short term memory loss found his high school senior picture

http://i28.tinypic.com/33vj41w.jpg

X-Terminator
09-03-2009, 05:36 PM
The fact that you are so concerned about me and my circle-jerks is nothing short of a compliment as far as I'm concerned and your classy discourse is so refreshing.

And since you did enough research on me to provide the link, you should have no problem acknowledging that I predicted no such thing. I asked a rhetorical question which is far from making a prediction.

But any sober analysis would prove that if I had predicted as much, I would have been incredibly close to calling it on the nose.

The Steelers had the lead in the 2nd half of the Super Bowl and COULD NOT RUN OUT THE CLOCK. Parker had 11 carries for a pitiful 19 yards (including a 15 yard run) and the Steelers had ONE rushing 1st down in the 2nd half.

Unable to control the ball or the clock, Kurt Warner got another shot and put the Cardinals up late in the game.

So if it weren't for a HOF QB and the no-huddle package (which, ahem, had FWP standing on the sidelines), yes the lack of running game would have absolutely cost the Steelers a Super Bowl. So it's too bad I did not predict as much, as it would have been an awfully smart thing to predict.

And of course, it's Parker's, and ONLY Parker's fault that they blew the lead in the 4th quarter. I mean, our all-world defense hemorrhaging yards and TDs in the 4th had absolutely nothing to do with it.

That HOF QB bailed out the defense's letdown. Not Parker's. Had they lost, it would have been the defense's fault. Not Parker's.

So you were still wrong. Parker DID NOT cost the Steelers the SB, period. Almost doesn't count - in fact, it doesn't even apply here.

There's nothing wrong with admitting that you made an incorrect assumption, but of course, I know you won't. You'll just whine some more about how nobody gets your point.

UltimateFootballNetwork
09-03-2009, 05:55 PM
And of course, it's Parker's, and ONLY Parker's fault that they blew the lead in the 4th quarter. I mean, our all-world defense hemorrhaging yards and TDs in the 4th had absolutely nothing to do with it.

That HOF QB bailed out the defense's letdown. Not Parker's. Had they lost, it would have been the defense's fault. Not Parker's.

So you were still wrong. Parker DID NOT cost the Steelers the SB, period. Almost doesn't count - in fact, it doesn't even apply here.

There's nothing wrong with admitting that you made an incorrect assumption, but of course, I know you won't. You'll just whine some more about how nobody gets your point. Not at all whining.

Just astonished that you lay the blame on the defense facing one of the most potent passing attacks in NFL history yet insist that the guy who had 11 carries for 19 yards is 100% definitely not the problem.

It's a pretty silly thought.

If Parker had managed a paltry 3 yds per carry, gaining as little as 33 yards rushing the Steelers would have managed 2 and maybe 3 (!) 1st downs which....

wait for it.....

Keeps the Cardinals offense off the field.

If you don't think 11 carries for 19 yards and 1 1st down is a problem I can't help you.

steelreserve
09-03-2009, 06:06 PM
And of course, it's Parker's, and ONLY Parker's fault that they blew the lead in the 4th quarter. I mean, our all-world defense hemorrhaging yards and TDs in the 4th had absolutely nothing to do with it.

That HOF QB bailed out the defense's letdown. Not Parker's. Had they lost, it would have been the defense's fault. Not Parker's.

So you were still wrong. Parker DID NOT cost the Steelers the SB, period. Almost doesn't count - in fact, it doesn't even apply here.

There's nothing wrong with admitting that you made an incorrect assumption, but of course, I know you won't. You'll just whine some more about how nobody gets your point.

Here, let me rephrase his point in a more realistic frame of reference: "Parker sucked ass in the Super Bowl. In fact, he almost always sucks in big games."

This is more relevant, not to mention you'd be hard-pressed to prove it wrong.

Preacher
09-03-2009, 07:50 PM
Here, let me rephrase his point in a more realistic frame of reference: "Parker sucked ass in the Super Bowl. In fact, he almost always sucks in big games."

This is more relevant, not to mention you'd be hard-pressed to prove it wrong.

Well this is an interesting statement.... and not hard at all to prove wrong.

Let's take a look at winning team RB's in the SB shall we?

Michael Pittman Tampa 124 Yards Rushing SB XXXVII
Dominic Rhodes Colts 113 Yards Rushing SB XLI
Jamal Lewis Ravens 101 Yards Rushing SB XXXV
Willie P. Steelers 93 Yards Rushing SB XL
Antowain Smith Pats* 92 Yards Rushing SB XXXVI
Antowain Smith Pats* 83 Yards Rushing SB XXXVIII
Corey Dillon Pats* 75 Yards Rushing SB XXXIX
Willie P. STeelers 53 Yards rushing SB XLIII
A. Bradshaw Giants 45 yards rushing SB XLII
Marshall Faulk Rams 17 Yards Rushing SB XXXIV

___________________

So, in the last ten SB's, Willie has the 4th best and 7th best rush totals.

Not sure that is "sucking ass" Now, if BOTH were in the bottom, I would agree with you. However, if both were at the top....

And no, I DIDNT look at average run, because Jamal Lewis would be towards the bottom, since they just loaded the box against him. The Colts would be at the very top, because they are such a passing team, that no one was really expecting that run attack.


Also, what is the BIGGEST SET OF GAMES? The playoffs. The STeelers have NEVER LOST A PLAYOFF GAME when Willie was playing. But they DID lose when Willie had to sit out. The long and short of it is, you simply cannot measure a player by stats. Nor the impact on the game solely by how many yards he runs. I have said this from the beginning about Willie P. Defenses have to adjust for him, BECAUSE of his speed.

X-Terminator
09-03-2009, 08:41 PM
Here, let me rephrase his point in a more realistic frame of reference: "Parker sucked ass in the Super Bowl. In fact, he almost always sucks in big games."

This is more relevant, not to mention you'd be hard-pressed to prove it wrong.

But did it COST the team the Super Bowl?

NO.

THAT is MY point. The guy said Parker would cost the team the title. He did not. The end.

UltimateFootballNetwork
09-03-2009, 09:24 PM
But did it COST the team the Super Bowl?

NO.

THAT is MY point. The guy said Parker would cost the team the title. He did not. The end. No matter how many times you repeat that it's not going to be true.

Preacher
09-03-2009, 09:48 PM
No matter how many times you repeat that it's not going to be true.

We DIDN'T win the SB? :noidea:

revefsreleets
09-03-2009, 10:36 PM
Haven't you guys figure out that this dude is a flat-Earther?

NOTHING anyone says or does will EVER change his mind about his Tulane guy...if Moore ends up on the Falcons or Panthers or Vikings (again) next year, he'll be trolling their boards with "statistical analysis" that proves that Moore is a better back than Michael Turner or DeAngelo Williams or Adrian Peterson.

He lives in Bizarro World and there's nothing anyone here can do for him other than ignoring his delusions...

UltimateFootballNetwork
09-03-2009, 11:39 PM
Haven't you guys figure out that this dude is a flat-Earther?

NOTHING anyone says or does will EVER change his mind about his Tulane guy...if Moore ends up on the Falcons or Panthers or Vikings (again) next year, he'll be trolling their boards with "statistical analysis" that proves that Moore is a better back than Michael Turner or DeAngelo Williams or Adrian Peterson.

He lives in Bizarro World and there's nothing anyone here can do for him other than ignoring his delusions... This is a fascinating comment, as it was once the guy who said that the earth was round that everyone thought was crazy. In your own analogy, I would be the guy calling the earth round.

See, at no point have I ever suggested anything approaching Moore being a better back than Adrian Peterson or Michael Turner. That's a ridiculous strawman.

UltimateFootballNetwork
09-03-2009, 11:40 PM
We DIDN'T win the SB? :noidea: No. I made no such prediction. I asked a question.

X-Terminator
09-03-2009, 11:43 PM
No matter how many times you repeat that it's not going to be true.

*sighs* Let's try this again:

http://forums.steelersfever.com/showthread.php?t=30052&highlight=parker+starter+super+bowl

Again, if you didn't want your own words to come back and bite you in your e-ass, perhaps you shouldn't have said them.

UltimateFootballNetwork
09-04-2009, 01:18 AM
*sighs* Let's try this again:

http://forums.steelersfever.com/showthread.php?t=30052&highlight=parker+starter+super+bowl

Again, if you didn't want your own words to come back and bite you in your e-ass, perhaps you shouldn't have said them.
Asking whether something will happen is entirely different than predicting something will happen.

Understanding that requires nothing more than basic grasp of the English language.

Preacher
09-04-2009, 02:41 AM
Asking whether something will happen is entirely different than predicting something will happen.

Understanding that requires nothing more than basic grasp of the English language.

:nono: In the question you ask, you presume the answer... and your presumption is wrong.

Here... have a read and educate yourself (http://www.sil.org/LINGUISTICS/GlossaryOfLinguisticTerms/WhatIsASpeechAct.htm) (not being ugly here... it is an entire philosophy on hermeneutics and language).

Then do a search for speech-act theory.

You may find it interesting, you may not. If you do, PM me and we can talk about it.

BUt back to this thread, you intended through question to state that we would not win the SB with WIllie as the main RB.

Dino 6 Rings
09-04-2009, 09:55 AM
Ok, I'm just going to dance around and giggle at this thread. Its obvious the guy wants accepted as a Steelers fan (for as long as Moore is on the team) So I suggest we mail this guy a Terrible Towel and welcome him to the Steelers nation. Its ok UFN...we welcome you to the Nation, you can go buy your Steelers Moore Jersey and say you've "always been a Steelers fan" we won't tell anyone.

:dancing:

Indo
09-04-2009, 10:07 AM
Ok, I'm just going to dance around and giggle at this thread. Its obvious the guy wants accepted as a Steelers fan (for as long as Moore is on the team) So I suggest we mail this guy a Terrible Towel and welcome him to the Steelers nation. Its ok UFN...we welcome you to the Nation, you can go buy your Steelers Moore Jersey and say you've "always been a Steelers fan" we won't tell anyone.

:dancing:

:laughing:

The_WARDen
09-04-2009, 10:26 AM
Ok, I'm just going to dance around and giggle at this thread. Its obvious the guy wants accepted as a Steelers fan (for as long as Moore is on the team) So I suggest we mail this guy a Terrible Towel and welcome him to the Steelers nation. Its ok UFN...we welcome you to the Nation, you can go buy your Steelers Moore Jersey and say you've "always been a Steelers fan" we won't tell anyone.

:dancing:

I think it's as simple as promoting the Ultimate Football Network by posting over and over again. The content doesn't really matter cause each post advertises Ultimate Football Network.

:coffee:

X-Terminator
09-04-2009, 10:59 AM
Ok, I'm just going to dance around and giggle at this thread. Its obvious the guy wants accepted as a Steelers fan (for as long as Moore is on the team) So I suggest we mail this guy a Terrible Towel and welcome him to the Steelers nation. Its ok UFN...we welcome you to the Nation, you can go buy your Steelers Moore Jersey and say you've "always been a Steelers fan" we won't tell anyone.

:dancing:

No thanks - UFN is not worthy of affiliation with The Nation. Let him remain a fan of the chronic underachievers that are the Washington Redskins, and not have him stinking up our fanbase.

revefsreleets
09-04-2009, 11:19 AM
This is a fascinating comment, as it was once the guy who said that the earth was round that everyone thought was crazy. In your own analogy, I would be the guy calling the earth round.

See, at no point have I ever suggested anything approaching Moore being a better back than Adrian Peterson or Michael Turner. That's a ridiculous strawman.

Not yet...but I bet you stated that Moore was the best RB on the Vikes when he was there...It's funny, because I went back and looked at a 2006 Vikes scouting report and it said (paraphrasing, but it was damned close to this) "Chester Taylor had no trouble taking the starting spot from Mewelde Moore, as the fragile Moore missed time with knee problems".

THAT was from Viking insiders...he already had a rep for being Glass Joe back then, and couldn't beat out CHESTER freaking Taylor.

Bear in mind, that at one point in 2007, a healthy Parker was the leading NFL rusher, AHEAD of Adrian Peterson. So how can it be ridiculous to assert that you'd think your guy was better than a guy who Parker was outrushing just a couple years ago? And you DO think Moore is a better RB than Parker.

All this tangled and twisted "logic" eventually found it's way back to bite you in the ass....

SteelMember
09-04-2009, 12:02 PM
Here's a start for some of you "artists" out there.

http://www.mirpod.com/IMG/arton1268.jpg

wanna see moore? :chuckle:

steelreserve
09-04-2009, 12:33 PM
Well this is an interesting statement.... and not hard at all to prove wrong.

Let's take a look at winning team RB's in the SB shall we?

Michael Pittman Tampa 124 Yards Rushing SB XXXVII
Dominic Rhodes Colts 113 Yards Rushing SB XLI
Jamal Lewis Ravens 101 Yards Rushing SB XXXV
Antowain Smith Pats* 92 Yards Rushing SB XXXVI
Antowain Smith Pats* 83 Yards Rushing SB XXXVIII
Corey Dillon Pats* 75 Yards Rushing SB XXXIX
Willie P. STeelers 53 Yards rushing SB XLIII
A. Bradshaw Giants 45 yards rushing SB XLII
Willie P. Steelers 18 Yards Rushing SB XL
Marshall Faulk Rams 17 Yards Rushing SB XXXIV

___________________

So, in the last ten SB's, Willie has the 4th best and 7th best rush totals.

Not sure that is "sucking ass" Now, if BOTH were in the bottom, I would agree with you. However, if both were at the top....

And no, I DIDNT look at average run, because Jamal Lewis would be towards the bottom, since they just loaded the box against him. The Colts would be at the very top, because they are such a passing team, that no one was really expecting that run attack.


Also, what is the BIGGEST SET OF GAMES? The playoffs. The STeelers have NEVER LOST A PLAYOFF GAME when Willie was playing. But they DID lose when Willie had to sit out. The long and short of it is, you simply cannot measure a player by stats. Nor the impact on the game solely by how many yards he runs. I have said this from the beginning about Willie P. Defenses have to adjust for him, BECAUSE of his speed.

Oh, please. Parker had one big, LUCKY run in Super Bowl XL that his supporters have been clinging to for years as evidence that he gets it done when it counts. Look at your precious little list otherwise.

No. To say Parker sucks ass is the playoffs doesn't even do it justice. He sucks two or three dicks at the same time in the playoffs. He's had one good game ever -- last year against San Diego -- one OK game that would have been absolutely terrible if not for the long run, and five complete stink bombs. We're lucky if he breaks out of the 2 YPC range. And that's usually where you'll find him during the regular season against the Ravens or any other team with a decent record. Look it up if you don't believe me; it's pretty much indisputable.

Basically, because of him, we've had trouble moving the ball on the ground in every single playoff game since 2005 except the San Diego game, and we've had to win because of Ben and the defense. Yes, even Super Bowl XL -- I know you're absolutely itching to say "OH IS IT REALLY FAIR TO JUST IGNORE THE BIG RUN," but truth is, we were awful at running the ball all day outside of that one play, and our offense was jerky and awkward because of it. All this crap about Parker being our rabbit's foot in the playoffs is just that, crap, because we've won all those games in spite of him, not because of him. I'm sick of giving ourselves that kind of a handicap every time we play somebody good. He's not even hit-or-miss. He's hit-or-miss-or-miss-or-miss-or-miss-or-miss-or-miss. The coaches ought to know better than to rely on him in those kinds of games.


PIT @ CIN W 31-17 16 38 2.38
PIT @ IND W 21-18 17 59 3.47
PIT @ DEN W 34-17 14 35 2.50
PIT N SEA W 21-10 10 93 9.30

PIT SDG W 35-24 27 146 5.41
PIT BAL W 23-14 24 47 1.96
PIT N ARI W 27-23 19 53 2.79

UltimateFootballNetwork
09-04-2009, 03:15 PM
Just wow.

Speech-act theory, subliminal advertising, a closet Steelers fan, the transitive theory of football analysis meaning I MUST think that Mewelde Moore is better than Adrian Peterson....

...everything but talking about the Steelers run game, which is all that I'm here for.

You can take off the tin-foil hats now...

edit: Steelreserve has it right. I'll let him take it from here.

revefsreleets
09-04-2009, 03:30 PM
Steelreserve has the distinction of being the only other guy on the PLANET who hates Parker worse than you. So his credibility on his particular subject is, um, a little shallow at best...

Got bad news for the haters...Parker's been hitting the JUGS machine and catching thousands of passes in the off-season...with that single additional facet added to his arsenal, he becomes a multi-dimensional back (like Moore) and gets a LOT more wide open fields in front of him. He's probably going to have a pretty nice season...

Parker hate is old and tired and boring...

Oh, and tossing out some .50 cent words and attempting to dabble in a little intellectual discourse may confuse a few of the less astute posters here, but if you want to go there, I'LL be your hucklebuck...

YOU wove this web of nonsense, fella, not me...and you'll have to either untangle yourself or struggle and become even more deeply snarled than you already are...

Preacher
09-04-2009, 03:37 PM
I LOVE it.

Parker sucks! Here, let me prove it. Take out his BIG RUNS.. and look at his average, which shows that he sucks in BIG GAMES. But wait, that BIG RUN was what SCORED THE TD and helped break the Back of the Seahawks.

Its a circular argument.

Well, I shoulda known better. :wave: now.

UltimateFootballNetwork
09-04-2009, 04:07 PM
Steelreserve has the distinction of being the only other guy on the PLANET who hates Parker worse than you. So his credibility on his particular subject is, um, a little shallow at best...

Got bad news for the haters...Parker's been hitting the JUGS machine and catching thousands of passes in the off-season...with that single additional facet added to his arsenal, he becomes a multi-dimensional back (like Moore) and gets a LOT more wide open fields in front of him. He's probably going to have a pretty nice season...

Parker hate is old and tired and boring...

Oh, and tossing out some .50 cent words and attempting to dabble in a little intellectual discourse may confuse a few of the less astute posters here, but if you want to go there, I'LL be your hucklebuck...

YOU wove this web of nonsense, fella, not me...and you'll have to either untangle yourself or struggle and become even more deeply snarled than you already are...
As a reminder, I'm the one suggesting that the Steelers should be using their most effective RB more often. Which makes the "web of nonsense" part remarkable.

It's not Parker hate. It's simply a sober analysis of a 29 year old RB coming off an injury plagued 3.8ypc season.

I'm not the one calling common sense and facts a web of nonsense.

UltimateFootballNetwork
09-04-2009, 04:10 PM
I LOVE it.

Parker sucks! Here, let me prove it. Take out his BIG RUNS.. and look at his average, which shows that he sucks in BIG GAMES. But wait, that BIG RUN was what SCORED THE TD and helped break the Back of the Seahawks.

Its a circular argument.

Well, I shoulda known better. :wave: now. No. I'm not and never have talked about taking out any big runs or anything else.

But if the backing for your argument continues to be Willie Parker's big play ability than you should probably acknowledge that he hasn't had a run of 40+ since 2006.

The full facts suggest that Parker was a mediocre or average RB in 2008. Will he get healthier at 29 years old?

Not hate. Just a question that SHOULD be a topic for discussion around here with Mendenhall looking pretty underwhelming.

steelreserve
09-04-2009, 04:51 PM
I LOVE it.

Parker sucks! Here, let me prove it. Take out his BIG RUNS.. and look at his average, which shows that he sucks in BIG GAMES. But wait, that BIG RUN was what SCORED THE TD and helped break the Back of the Seahawks.

Its a circular argument.

Well, I shoulda known better. :wave: now.

Whatever. He had one big play and then did a piss-poor job for six games straight. I don't think I'm the one having trouble seeing the big picture.

If it was the World Series, and your cleanup hitter went 1-for-30 with one home run and 29 strikeouts, would you say he had a good series? I don't think you would.

revefsreleets
09-04-2009, 05:01 PM
As a reminder, I'm the one suggesting that the Steelers should be using their most effective RB more often. Which makes the "web of nonsense" part remarkable.

It's not Parker hate. It's simply a sober analysis of a 29 year old RB coming off an injury plagued 3.8ypc season.

I'm not the one calling common sense and facts a web of nonsense.

They will. They named Willie their starter pretty early on, and he'll get the bulk of the carries. He'll have a pretty good season, too, and Melo will do an adequate job fulfilling his supporting role behind Parker and Mendenhall right where he belongs...

THAT'S a fact, Jack, in spite of all the hundreds of thousands of keystrokes you wasted typing otherwise

UltimateFootballNetwork
09-04-2009, 05:35 PM
They will. They named Willie their starter pretty early on, and he'll get the bulk of the carries. He'll have a pretty good season, too, and Melo will do an adequate job fulfilling his supporting role behind Parker and Mendenhall right where he belongs...

THAT'S a fact, Jack, in spite of all the hundreds of thousands of keystrokes you wasted typing otherwise
No one has questioned what the depth chart will be. The question is what the depth chart should be.

Interesting that you think that Moore is behind Mendenhall "where he belongs". Fascinating stuff. Zero chance Mendenhall is a better RB than Moore.

steelreserve
09-04-2009, 05:38 PM
No one has questioned what the depth chart will be. The question is what the depth chart should be.

Interesting that you think that Moore is behind Mendenhall "where he belongs". Fascinating stuff. Zero chance Mendenhall is a better RB than Moore.

Now even I'm going to have to call BS on that one. We have no idea how good Mendenhall really is. He could turn out to be way better than Moore, or he could turn out to suck. It's all speculation.

revefsreleets
09-04-2009, 05:46 PM
That's the smoking gun right there that this dude lives in Cloud Cuckoo Land...we have almost NO data on Mendenhall, and a grand total of 404 carries over several years and two separate PRO franchises who have (correctly) deemed Melo a back-up/situational back, but UFN knows better ALREADY.

Class is dismissed...and you fail...

UltimateFootballNetwork
09-04-2009, 05:57 PM
That's the smoking gun right there that this dude lives in Cloud Cuckoo Land...we have almost NO data on Mendenhall, and a grand total of 404 carries over several years and two separate PRO franchises who have (correctly) deemed Melo a back-up/situational back, but UFN knows better ALREADY.

Class is dismissed...and you fail... No, that's just obvious from watching a RB who has no vision and doesn't like to get hit. He won't be a very good NFL RB and I'm happy to make that prediction and stand behind it.

I also love how the guy who refuses to believe facts, things that have already happened and cannot be argued can also definitively suggest that I "failed" on a prediction on something which has yet to happen.

X-Terminator
09-04-2009, 10:58 PM
No, that's just obvious from watching a RB who has no vision and doesn't like to get hit. He won't be a very good NFL RB and I'm happy to make that prediction and stand behind it.

I also love how the guy who refuses to believe facts, things that have already happened and cannot be argued can also definitively suggest that I "failed" on a prediction on something which has yet to happen.

And of course, you base this on less than 100 carries for Mendenhall.

See, this is the kind of BS that gets your ass roasted on here. How the hell do you know he's going to be a bust? Did the voices in your empty head tell you that? Did you channel Miss Cleo or something? You simply CANNOT make that assumption based on so little body of work!

God, I might as well be talking to a chimp.

UltimateFootballNetwork
09-05-2009, 12:53 AM
And of course, you base this on less than 100 carries for Mendenhall.

See, this is the kind of BS that gets your ass roasted on here. How the hell do you know he's going to be a bust? Did the voices in your empty head tell you that? Did you channel Miss Cleo or something? You simply CANNOT make that assumption based on so little body of work!

God, I might as well be talking to a chimp. I'm a chimp now. Continuing to attack the messenger when you can't attack the message...

It only took me about 5 carries to see that Mendenhall has no vision and doesn't like getting hit. So it's my PREDICTION that Mendenhall is a bust. I don't know for a FACT that Mendenhall is a bust, but I believe strongly enough that he is to state my opinion.

That's different than arguing against fact. What DID happen over the course of a season, which you seem to seem to have a problem with accepting.

But no I don't and can't KNOW that Mendenhall is a bust, that's just my opinion. So let's be clear, since you seem unaware of the difference.

edit- and at 3.1 yds per rush on the preseason, what a stretch, huh? And no way you can blame it on the OL, cause he had a handful of runs where the OL gave him enormous holes...

Steeldude
09-05-2009, 01:46 AM
here is my take on the topic.

as of now moore is better than mendenhall.

last year moore was the steelers most effective RB.

the jury is still out on mendenhall. IMO though, from what i have seen so far, he doesn't look like what the steelers hoped for, but it's still too early for anyone to really say he sucks or can't live up to the 1st round status.

i see a lot of people are down on UFN, but he makes a good point about it looking like he is afraid to get hit. i noticed it last year also. this doesn't mean he runs towards the other endzone, but it does appear that he kind of refrains a little from making hard contact. will this remain a standard? no way to tell until he gets some solid playing time. he certainly has the size and speed to make things happen, but then again so did curtis enis and lawrence phillips.

i really don't care who runs the ball. just as long as they do a good job of it.

steeltheone
09-05-2009, 02:42 AM
I'm thinking he is a bust too..MM could be our starter if FWP goes down

sharkweek
09-05-2009, 04:43 AM
I guess you're a bust if you get seriously injured and miss most of your rookie season :rolleyes:

I'm going to wait until he's actually played a season before judging him. Obviously, if he gets injured again and can't complete most of a season, then he's a bust for being too fragile.

The good news is that he's still really young, only 22 years old. I just hope he can find the fire to play like he did against USC in the Rose Bowl.

Parker may be getting old and might not have much of a future, but in that same light, Moore isn't exactly brimming with youth either. The future of our ground game either lies with Mendenhall or someone else. Players like Parker and Moore can certainly help with the transition.

steelreserve
09-05-2009, 04:50 AM
Moore could be the starter for a while if Mendenhall doesn't work out and Parker keeps being Parker. So I can rest a little easier knowing that even though we might not have any great RB on the roster, we at least have a guaranteed OK one, and it LOOKS like Tomlin's smart enough to recognize that for what it is at this point.

If that happens, though, I think we'd damn well better invest a first-day pick in another RB, or trade for one, or sign one, or whatever. There's nothing like a sure thing among the guys we've got.

mmalone
09-05-2009, 07:13 AM
No, that's just obvious from watching a RB who has no vision and doesn't like to get hit. .

He is young and this will be is coming out year, tomlin said he expects the 2nd year plauers to break out.

the taing the hit part i have mentioned before.


watch Parker or Moore or Logan take the hits... there legs keep driving and they move forward in a northernly direction... aiming for the sticks... or goal line..

watch Mendenhall, a very frequent amount of time he curls his back to the hits and falls in a fetal position with his head facing east or west.. with no last ditch drive.

thats how cracked his shoulder blade, taking hits to his exposed back...

he needs to stop that.. watch the last few games.. he does it alot.

Aussie_steeler
09-05-2009, 07:18 AM
It only took me about 5 carries to see that Mendenhall has no vision and doesn't like getting hit. So it's my PREDICTION that Mendenhall is a bust. I don't know for a FACT that Mendenhall is a bust, but I believe strongly enough that he is to state my opinion.


OK you are the man for stating and arguing facts regarding Mewelde. But you wont state facts regarding Mendenhall. Step up to the plate and name the game and the five plays.

Please provide the criteria that you use to so effectively assess
a) no vision
b) perceived lack of sack when confronted with contact

If you can somehow produce the necessary facts out of 5 plays to validate that Mendenhall is and forever will be a bust, I will proclaim your butt as the most golden one on the planet. Mel Kiper, Todd McShay and the other countless self proclaimed experts in field of nfl talent analysis must be sh*tting themselves with your emergence on the scene.

Until you can back up your claims regarding Rashad Mendenhall I hearby proclaim you Ultimate F#ck Nuckle. And that is me stating my opinion.

revefsreleets
09-05-2009, 07:55 AM
I watched Mendenhall carry the ball probably 100 times in college. Since all we've REALLY seen of him as a pro was a few carries IN REAL GAMES last year, and a little shaking off the rust in preseason, assessments based on this year are <<< assessments based on his past performance.

Mendenhall will be a fine addition to the Steelers backfield, and he'll have a nice year splitting carries with Parker. Sour grapes and severe (and quite creepy, I might add) manlove for a fellow alum are NOT adequate credentials upon which to make players performance evaluations or prognostications....

Kindjunior
09-05-2009, 08:21 AM
hmm

BIGBENFASTWILLIE
09-05-2009, 08:24 AM
Hey, I give all the credit to Moore, and i hope hes one of the best backs in the league this year.....as long as he is in the black and gold

lamberts-lost-tooth
09-05-2009, 08:48 AM
No one has questioned what the depth chart will be. The question is what the depth chart should be.



Well now you have talked yourself into a corner.

You said yourself that your "analysis" was based on "2008 stats" only...because you just wanted to point out that Moore was the better back last year...and because of that... all the stats from the prior 3 years were irrelevant.

Yet..now you are making a depth chart based on the convenient disregard of all stats other than a year that Willie was injured.

Based on your silly cherry-picked logic...Answer this. Since Ben had a 75.4 QB rating in 2006, and Charle Batch had a 121.0 QB rating during that same year...We should have started Batch in 2007....right?

I wish Moore would read this thread ...knock on your door...introduce himself...and slap you.:doh:

lamberts-lost-tooth
09-05-2009, 08:51 AM
Until you can back up your claims regarding Rashad Mendenhall I hearby proclaim you Ultimate F#ck Nuckle. And that is me stating my opinion.


:applaudit::applaudit::applaudit:

X-Terminator
09-05-2009, 09:47 AM
Until you can back up your claims regarding Rashad Mendenhall I hearby proclaim you Ultimate F#ck Nuckle. And that is me stating my opinion.

Beautiful! :drink:

You're wasting your time, though. It's obvious from his quoted answer that he has nothing but his worthless "hunch." Mendenhall is a bust, and that's that, dammit, because great and powerful UFN said so! :coffee:

What a maroon...

X-Terminator
09-05-2009, 10:51 AM
here is my take on the topic.

as of now moore is better than mendenhall.

last year moore was the steelers most effective RB.

the jury is still out on mendenhall. IMO though, from what i have seen so far, he doesn't look like what the steelers hoped for, but it's still too early for anyone to really say he sucks or can't live up to the 1st round status.

i see a lot of people are down on UFN, but he makes a good point about it looking like he is afraid to get hit. i noticed it last year also. this doesn't mean he runs towards the other endzone, but it does appear that he kind of refrains a little from making hard contact. will this remain a standard? no way to tell until he gets some solid playing time. he certainly has the size and speed to make things happen, but then again so did curtis enis and lawrence phillips.

i really don't care who runs the ball. just as long as they do a good job of it.

That is a fair assessment.

And it's not like UFN hasn't given people a reason to be down on him. Taking down the Moore posters over his bed might go a long way toward resolving some of those issues.

UltimateFootballNetwork
09-05-2009, 11:32 AM
OK you are the man for stating and arguing facts regarding Mewelde. But you wont state facts regarding Mendenhall. Step up to the plate and name the game and the five plays.

Please provide the criteria that you use to so effectively assess
a) no vision
b) perceived lack of sack when confronted with contact

If you can somehow produce the necessary facts out of 5 plays to validate that Mendenhall is and forever will be a bust, I will proclaim your butt as the most golden one on the planet. Mel Kiper, Todd McShay and the other countless self proclaimed experts in field of nfl talent analysis must be sh*tting themselves with your emergence on the scene.

Until you can back up your claims regarding Rashad Mendenhall I hearby proclaim you Ultimate F#ck Nuckle. And that is me stating my opinion. And you are welcome to your opinion, as needlessly classy as it might be.

I find all this consternation about someone providing an opinion about football on a football forum hilarious, as if this forum were only for cheerleading and fairytales.

There is and can be no "fact" regarding the outcome of Mendenhall's career since it hasn't happened yet but as I said I stand behind my opinion. If I'm wrong I will happily eat crow, but I'm sure if you are wrong that you will make no such apology for your unwarranted personal attack.

UltimateFootballNetwork
09-05-2009, 11:34 AM
That is a fair assessment.

And it's not like UFN hasn't given people a reason to be down on him. Taking down the Moore posters over his bed might go a long way toward resolving some of those issues.
Yeah, when you look at it, my point it certainly a fair one. You've got yourself so convinced that anything I post needs to be attacked (and personally) that you've failed to realize that my points are quite fair.

Maybe I don't have Moore posters over my bed, maybe I just have a good point.

UltimateFootballNetwork
09-05-2009, 11:39 AM
I watched Mendenhall carry the ball probably 100 times in college. Since all we've REALLY seen of him as a pro was a few carries IN REAL GAMES last year, and a little shaking off the rust in preseason, assessments based on this year are <<< assessments based on his past performance.

Mendenhall will be a fine addition to the Steelers backfield, and he'll have a nice year splitting carries with Parker. Sour grapes and severe (and quite creepy, I might add) manlove for a fellow alum are NOT adequate credentials upon which to make players performance evaluations or prognostications.... Well what do you know.....guess who looks like they won't be splitting any carries....

Willie Parker didn't play in three of the four preseason games, but Steelers coach Mike Tomlin made it clear that he has no plans to rotate Parker and Rashard Mendenhall at running back.

"Willie Parker's our runner," Tomlin said Friday afternoon. "Rashard's done a nice job and he's going to get an opportunity to get his touches, but more important than anything else, Willie Parker is our runner."
http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/sports/s_641733.html

Interesting development. 1st round draft pick who can't earn regular playing time in his 2nd season would be called what?........

El-Gonzo Jackson
09-05-2009, 12:38 PM
Well what do you know.....guess who looks like they won't be splitting any carries....

http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/sports/s_641733.html

Interesting development. 1st round draft pick who can't earn regular playing time in his 2nd season would be called what?........

I think you call him Darren McFadden, Felix Jones, Jonathan Stewart and Rashard Mendenhall.

But, I guess this is all you have to hang onto since Mike Tomlin decided not to look at your analysis and anoint Mewelde Moore anything but the #3 back on the depth chart. :rofl:

Psyychoward86
09-05-2009, 12:43 PM
Interesting development. 1st round draft pick who can't earn regular playing time in his 2nd season would be called what?........

They could be called 1st round draft picks with immense potential, playing behind immense talent.

lamberts-lost-tooth
09-05-2009, 12:47 PM
Interesting development. 1st round draft pick who can't earn regular playing time in his 2nd season would be called what?........

In your usual twisted logic attempt to change the facts you ask a question predicated on predicting the future.

Since the 2nd season hasnt started yet...how do you make the assumption that he has not earned playing time? Until the second season has ended, your question is nothing more than a pathetic attempt to label a player as a bust.

Based on your lack of logic, Brandon Jacobs is a bust because he actually had fewer attempt per game and a lower ypc in his first season as a RB.

Guess we should all look for Jacobs on the waiver wire..right?

Your a Genius.:thumbsup:

El-Gonzo Jackson
09-05-2009, 12:47 PM
They could be called 1st round draft picks with immense potential, playing behind immense talent.

Stop..............the defending super bowl champions do not have immense talent. :toofunny:

tony hipchest
09-05-2009, 01:32 PM
Interesting development. 1st round draft pick who can't earn regular playing time in his 2nd season would be called what?...........hollow tip, kevlar busting, bullet in the chamber.

were locked and loaded. :bringit:

UltimateFootballNetwork
09-05-2009, 02:01 PM
In your usual twisted logic attempt to change the facts you ask a question predicated on predicting the future.

Since the 2nd season hasnt started yet...how do you make the assumption that he has not earned playing time? Until the second season has ended, your question is nothing more than a pathetic attempt to label a player as a bust.

Based on your lack of logic, Brandon Jacobs is a bust because he actually had fewer attempt per game and a lower ypc in his first season as a RB.

Guess we should all look for Jacobs on the waiver wire..right?

Your a Genius.:thumbsup: Um, that or Mike Tomlin's quote.

UltimateFootballNetwork
09-05-2009, 02:03 PM
I think you call him Darren McFadden, Felix Jones, Jonathan Stewart and Rashard Mendenhall.

But, I guess this is all you have to hang onto since Mike Tomlin decided not to look at your analysis and anoint Mewelde Moore anything but the #3 back on the depth chart. :rofl: Are you joking? McFadden, Jones and Stewart even though they've been limited with injury are key players on their respective offenses. Mendenhall will be on the sidelines indefinitely.

UltimateFootballNetwork
09-05-2009, 02:07 PM
They could be called 1st round draft picks with immense potential, playing behind immense talent. Sorry, but in the NFL a 1st round draft pick is supposed to be good enough to have a clear role going into his 2nd season.

And no matter what you think of Parker, "immense" talent is a bit of a stretch. He's good, but he's coming off of an injury plagued, 3.8 ypc season and his contract is up. You best believe they wanted Mendenhall to earn a role.

mmalone
09-05-2009, 02:09 PM
...hollow tip, kevlar busting, bullet in the chamber.

were locked and loaded. :bringit:

we are that.... more like a canon than a muzzleloader......


cant wait for the games....
:tt03::tt03::tt03:

UltimateFootballNetwork
09-05-2009, 02:11 PM
Most notably, though, Tomlin ended any speculation that Parker could split time and share carries with Mendenhall, the Steelers' 2008 first-round draft pick who injured his shoulder against the Baltimore Ravens last Sept. 29.
http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/sports/s_641733.html
Kevin Gorman, Tribune-Review, 9/5/09

lamberts-lost-tooth
09-05-2009, 02:13 PM
Um, that or Mike Tomlin's quote.

As usual..you cherry pick your quotes just like you cherry pick your stats...you must have missed the part where Tomlin said.


"Rashard's done a nice job and he's going to get an opportunity to get his touches, but more important than anything else, Willie Parker is our runner."

:rofl::rofl::rofl:

Nice try....now its time to go back to your arguement about how Moore is the best back ... if you only look at the stats when the Steelers are playing against teams with feline names...on Thursdays....in the rain. :chuckle:

X-Terminator
09-05-2009, 02:16 PM
Are you joking? McFadden, Jones and Stewart even though they've been limited with injury are key players on their respective offenses. Mendenhall will be on the sidelines indefinitely.

That, of course, is not what Tomlin said. Read the quote again - he said Willie will continue to get the bulk of the carries, but Mendenhall will get his touches. He said NOTHING about him being on the sidelines indefinitely. And as far as McFadden, Jones and Stewart, only McFadden has a chance to be the focal point of the offense since the Raiders still don't know what they're going to do with Justin Fargas. Jones is backing up Marion Barber, and while Stewart rotates with DeAngelo Williams, Williams will still get at least 75% of the touches. So your point, much like, well pretty much all of them, holds absolutely no water.

lamberts-lost-tooth
09-05-2009, 02:24 PM
Sorry, but in the NFL a 1st round draft pick is supposed to be good enough to have a clear role going into his 2nd season.



Really?...explain Aaron Rodgers for me. He was drafted in 2005 but didnt start until 2008.

By the way..he only had 28 TD's and over 4,000 yards passing. And never mind that he was ranked #6 in the NFL in regards to QB rating.


your an idiot.

UltimateFootballNetwork
09-05-2009, 02:26 PM
As usual..you cherry pick your quotes just like you cherry pick your stats...you must have missed the part where Tomlin said.




:rofl::rofl::rofl:

Nice try....now its time to go back to your arguement about how Moore is the best back ... if you only look at the stats when the Steelers are playing against teams with feline names...on Thursdays....in the rain. :chuckle:
Remarkable, because it looks like

a) it was you who cherry picked your quote and
b) Moore was the most effective back every single way possible in 2008, not the other way around.

UltimateFootballNetwork
09-05-2009, 02:28 PM
Really?...explain Aaron Rodgers for me. He was drafted in 2005 but didnt start until 2008.

By the way..he only had 28 TD's and over 4,000 yards passing. And never mind that he was ranked #6 in the NFL in regards to QB rating.


your an idiot.
This is not an intellectually honest argument.

You know very well that being behind a Hall of Fame Quarterback is a unique situation and not a worthwhile comparison here.

Mendenhall is not sitting behind one of the greatest RBs of all time.

And thanks for being classy, too.

lamberts-lost-tooth
09-05-2009, 02:32 PM
This is not an intellectually honest argument.

You know very well that being behind a Hall of Fame Quarterback is a unique situation and not a worthwhile comparison here.

Mendenhall is not sitting behind one of the greatest RBs of all time.

And thanks for being classy, too.

Then make the distinction in your statement!!! What YOU said was:

Sorry, but in the NFL a 1st round draft pick is supposed to be good enough to have a clear role going into his 2nd season.

But as usual when confronted with a fact that deflates your misplaced belief that you understand football...you looked for an "out".

nothing new...pretty much what we expect out of you.
:thumbsup:

tony hipchest
09-05-2009, 02:35 PM
Sorry, but in the NFL a 1st round draft pick is supposed to be good enough to have a clear role going into his 2nd season.

.please dude. theres 7 rounds in the draft. used to be more. do you really think the great 70's steelers were chock full of first round picks?

in the nfl, teams arent supposed to win 6 superbowls or send 4 players from a single draft class to the hall of fame with 4 rings.

just imagine if the nearly perfect steelers didnt release johnny unitas or pass on hometown hero dan marino. :noidea:

lamberts-lost-tooth
09-05-2009, 02:38 PM
Remarkable, because it looks like

a) it was you who cherry picked your quote and
b) Moore was the most effective back every single way possible in 2008, not the other way around.

:rofl::rofl:

Nice try...youre drowning today...might want to think about calling it a day and regrouping.

A) I didnt cherry pick...I gave the other half of the quote that YOU chose to ignore...(You know, the part of the quote that made your argument mute.)

B) Really? The fact that you want to continue to proclaim Moore the better back based on the ONE YEAR that Willie was injured continues to PROVE that you have blinders on in regards to true facts and shows you incapable of being a honest in this debate.

Next time bring an apple for the teacher...junior.

Dino 6 Rings
09-05-2009, 02:39 PM
14 more pages of "blah blah blah" this back is better "Blah blah blah"

Dance magic dance, Dance magic dance
Put that baby spell on me
Jump magic jump, jump magic jump
Put that magic jump on me
Slap that baby, make him free!!!

X-Terminator
09-05-2009, 02:42 PM
14 more pages of "blah blah blah" this back is better "Blah blah blah"

Nah, it's more like "kick UFN in the balls" because he's a moron. LLT is just taking his turn.

Dino 6 Rings
09-05-2009, 02:46 PM
Nah, it's more like "kick UFN in the balls" because he's a moron. LLT is just taking his turn.

LOL! Wonder if a mod could just merge every Kick UFN in the balls thread together so we can just read them and laugh.

lamberts-lost-tooth
09-05-2009, 02:48 PM
This is not an intellectually honest argument.

You know very well that being behind a Hall of Fame Quarterback is a unique situation and not a worthwhile comparison here.

Mendenhall is not sitting behind one of the greatest RBs of all time.

And thanks for being classy, too.


For the sake of being "intellectually honest"....here you go:

Phillip Rivers...drafted in 2004..didnt start until 2006...He had 29 TD's and threw for over 4000 yards....and unfortuantley for your lame argument...he ranked #1 with a in QB rating of 105.5 last year.


:rofl::rofl::rofl:

Make that Two Apples...thank you.:chuckle:

UltimateFootballNetwork
09-05-2009, 02:52 PM
please dude. theres 7 rounds in the draft. used to be more. do you really think the great 70's steelers were chock full of first round picks?

in the nfl, teams arent supposed to win 6 superbowls or send 4 players from a single draft class to the hall of fame with 4 rings.

just imagine if the nearly perfect steelers didnt release johnny unitas or pass on hometown hero dan marino. :noidea: What does any of this have to do with the obvious conclusion that Mendenhall has been a disappointment so far?

This is wild. Mendenhall just came off of a preseason averaging 3.1 yds per carry and the lead in the article about Tomlin's press conference was
Mike Tomlin made it clear that he has no plans to rotate Parker and Rashard Mendenhall at running back.

WTH are all of you arguing about? You all must be on auto-pilot just railing against everything I say.

It shouldn't be all that controversial to agree that Mendenhall has been a disappointment so far.

UltimateFootballNetwork
09-05-2009, 02:58 PM
For the sake of being "intellectually honest"....here you go:

Phillip Rivers...drafted in 2004..didnt start until 2006...He had 29 TD's and threw for over 4000 yards....and unfortuantley for your lame argument...he ranked #1 with a in QB rating of 105.5 last year.


:rofl::rofl::rofl:

Make that Two Apples...thank you.:chuckle:
He was sitting behind Drew Brees, another potential Hall of Famer.

Since it will make you happy to no end, I will gladly admit that I was wrong to assume that we would all realize that there are exceptions to every rule, but I spoke in absolutes. So you are completely correct in that there are a few 1st round draft picks that, for various reasons, don't start or play significant roles by their 2nd season.

....But that doesn't change the fact that Mendenhall isn't one of those exceptions. He has no role because he has disappointed to date. They wanted him to split carries with Willie Parker and he didn't show enough.

You can tell yourself otherwise if you want...

UltimateFootballNetwork
09-05-2009, 03:00 PM
Nah, it's more like "kick UFN in the balls" because he's a moron. LLT is just taking his turn.
I love how attack the messenger and never the message. You know what they say about that...

UltimateFootballNetwork
09-05-2009, 03:03 PM
Ed Bouchette on Mendenhall...

In case there was any doubt, Tomlin erased it when he emphatically declared that Willie Parker again will open the season as the team's prime back.

"Willie Parker's our runner," Tomlin declared.

How Rashard Mendenhall, the No. 1 draft pick last year, might be used was left unsaid.

"Rashard's done a nice job, he'll get his opportunities to get his touches," Tomlin said, and then emphasized, "but more importantly than anything else, Willie Parker is our runner."

With Mewelde Moore holding down the job on third downs, the opportunities for Mendenhall might not come too frequently early in the season.

Read more: http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/09248/995781-66.stm#ixzz0QGD7ZSRY

lamberts-lost-tooth
09-05-2009, 03:04 PM
What does any of this have to do with the obvious conclusion that Mendenhall has been a disappointment so far?

This is wild. Mendenhall just came off of a preseason averaging 3.1 yds per carry and the lead in the article about Tomlin's press conference was




Any season in which a player is hurt after 4 games are a write off in regards to evaluation. Any attempt to make a fair assesment on such a player smells of:

1) being a steeler "hater"
2) trying to sound intellectual on topics in which ...well...your not.

WTH are all of you arguing about? You all must be on auto-pilot just railing against everything I say.

It shouldn't be all that controversial to agree that Mendenhall has been a disappointment so far

Let me put this in a manner in which you might actually understand where we are coming from. :tap:

Lets pretend that this forum is a home owned by the "Winslows"...think of yourself as continually showing up uninvited...wearing high-water pants, suspenders and multi-colored cardigans.. and saying silly things until we collectively have to say..."Go home Steve!"

Hope that helps.

lamberts-lost-tooth
09-05-2009, 03:07 PM
I'm sorry...all I heard was:


I was wrong... I spoke in absolutes....you are completely correct .

Hey!!! I can get into this cherry-picking of quotes...I see why you like it so much!!!:thumbsup:

Preacher
09-05-2009, 03:08 PM
Seasons in which a player is hurt after 4 games are a write off in regards to evaluation. Any attempt to make a fair assesment on tha player smells of:

1) being a steeler "hater"
2) trying to sound intellectual on topics in which ...well...your not.



Let me put this in a manner in which you might actually understand where we are coming from. :tap:

Lets pretend that this forum is a home owned by the "Winslows"...think of yourself as continually showing up uninvited...wearing high-water pants, suspenders and multi-colored cardigans.. and saying silly things until we collectively have to say..."Go home Steve!"

Hope that helps.
:rofl:

Absolutely Hilarious.

UltimateFootballNetwork
09-05-2009, 03:19 PM
Any season in which a player is hurt after 4 games are a write off in regards to evaluation. Any attempt to make a fair assesment on such a player smells of:

1) being a steeler "hater"
2) trying to sound intellectual on topics in which ...well...your not.



Let me put this in a manner in which you might actually understand where we are coming from. :tap:

Lets pretend that this forum is a home owned by the "Winslows"...think of yourself as continually showing up uninvited...wearing high-water pants, suspenders and multi-colored cardigans.. and saying silly things until we collectively have to say..."Go home Steve!"

Hope that helps. Um, ok, which would be fine if you or whoever "owned" this forum decided to make it a private forum. But they didn't.

And the fact that differing opinions are considered "uninvited" doesn't speak very well for the forum.

The fact that you consider a statement like "Mendenhall has been a disappointment so far" to be "silly" seems incredibly closed-minded to me.

tony hipchest
09-05-2009, 03:23 PM
What does any of this have to do with the obvious conclusion that Mendenhall has been a disappointment so far?

This is wild. Mendenhall just came off of a preseason averaging 3.1 yds per carry and the lead in the article about Tomlin's press conference was


WTH are all of you arguing about? You all must be on auto-pilot just railing against everything I say.

It shouldn't be all that controversial to agree that Mendenhall has been a disappointment so far.chill with the paranoia... i am one of the few who doesnt rail against everything you say (just the ignorant posts).

my point is, missing on a second round draft pick linebacker such as alonzo jackson, pretty much becomes a wash when you find an undrafted james harrison off of the street.

we can afford to bring #1 pick timmons along slowly, when we strike gold with our #2 pick woodley.

you will probably be calling ziggy hood a bust after this season, for nothing more than his 1st round draft selection.

mendenhall, sweed, timmons, hood, k. lewis, m. wallace, urbick, would EASILLY be starting on atleast a dozen of the sucky teams in this league who arent vying for a lombardi trophy year after year.

troy polamalu wasnt even starting until his second year and he was getting burnt badly for a TD by tom brady in the AFCC game, in that first year starting. ben was looked at as nothing more than a game manager until his fourth year. santonio holmes STILL hasnt put up the fantasy numbers expected from the #1 receiver taken in his draft class.

the ONLY recent fantasy football impact 1st round player we have had was heath miller, who (through his first 8 proffessional games) was on pace to break or tie antonio gates single season TD record for a tight end.

its obvious you are a fan of football. there is football, and then there is steelers football. we just happen to operate under a less conventional, different set of rules.

that is why we are the 6X superbowl champs. :tt02:

alot of other teams fans dont get that. :hunch:

lamberts-lost-tooth
09-05-2009, 03:28 PM
Um, ok, which would be fine if you or whoever "owned" this forum decided to make it a private forum. But they didn't.



We dont want a private forum...but we expect more from our members than to treat each thread as his personal "Willie sucks shampoo debate"......apply...wash....rinse...repeat....apply...wa sh....rinse...repeat....apply....wash....rinse...r epeat....etc.

And the fact that differing opinions are considered "uninvited" doesn't speak very well for the forum.

differing opinions are welcomed...stupid opinions based on cherry picked facts and quotes will be treated as such.

The fact that you consider a statement like "Mendenhall has been a disappointment so far" to be "silly" seems incredibly closed-minded to me

The fact that you present yourself as some kind of expert and then you not only try and evaluate a player who was hurt four games into his rookie season, but also label him a bust seems to be "silly" and incredibly closed minded to me.


next?

Preacher
09-05-2009, 03:37 PM
He was sitting behind Drew Brees, another potential Hall of Famer.

Since it will make you happy to no end, I will gladly admit that I was wrong to assume that we would all realize that there are exceptions to every rule, but I spoke in absolutes. So you are completely correct in that there are a few 1st round draft picks that, for various reasons, don't start or play significant roles by their 2nd season.

....But that doesn't change the fact that Mendenhall isn't one of those exceptions. He has no role because he has disappointed to date. They wanted him to split carries with Willie Parker and he didn't show enough.

You can tell yourself otherwise if you want...

Please tell me the last 1st round draft pick that came in and unseated a starter in his first year. Because for all intents and purposes.. this IS his first year. 4 games and then an injury doesnt quite count for a years worth of experience. Heck... lets try second year.

Ben and Heath are the only two that I can think of... and Ben got in ONLY by injury to the starter. Heath came in via change in philosophy to help out Ben. Neither of them unseated a pro-bowl player.

See that is the problem with fans of other teams coming in here and trying to talk up stuff when they don't know the culture or history of this team.

So Mendy is actually in just about the right frame of development for a Steeler player. First season very little playing time. Second season a bit more.

revefsreleets
09-05-2009, 04:41 PM
and he's going to get an opportunity to get his touches

Mendy will touch the ball...I figure it'll be about 1/3 as much as Parker. Parker's the guy, and he'll have a nice season, and Mendy will get his touches, as will Moore...how pathetic and sad is it that you are quoting Tomlin and claiming that it affirms YOUR stupid argument when it's actually exactly in line with everything I'VE been saying all along?

Either way , YOU will proven WRONG. You need to leave before you are embarrassed more than you already have been...you're a sad and sorry talent evaluator, a hopeless homer in love with a journeyman mid-tier talent RB, and you're further handicapped by obsessively hating on better RB's than your boyfriend who KEEPS getting beat out of roster spots by better, more capable RB's, and you NEED to let this go...

Preacher
09-05-2009, 05:16 PM
What I want to know is... If Mendy is that much of a bust already that he can't beat Parker....

And as we ALL know.. Parker completely sucks....

Then what does that say about MeMo who still can't break the starting lineup except by injury? :noidea:

X-Terminator
09-05-2009, 05:29 PM
Please tell me the last 1st round draft pick that came in and unseated a starter in his first year. Because for all intents and purposes.. this IS his first year. 4 games and then an injury doesnt quite count for a years worth of experience. Heck... lets try second year.

Ben and Heath are the only two that I can think of... and Ben got in ONLY by injury to the starter. Heath came in via change in philosophy to help out Ben. Neither of them unseated a pro-bowl player.

See that is the problem with fans of other teams coming in here and trying to talk up stuff when they don't know the culture or history of this team.

So Mendy is actually in just about the right frame of development for a Steeler player. First season very little playing time. Second season a bit more.

Exactly, and by his 3rd season, he's expected to be a significant contributer and starter. That is the way the Steelers have operated as long as I can remember. Of course, there are exceptions as you've stated. But good luck trying to explain that to UltimateF***Nuckle.

Aussie_steeler
09-05-2009, 09:19 PM
And you are welcome to your opinion, as needlessly classy as it might be.

I find all this consternation about someone providing an opinion about football on a football forum hilarious, as if this forum were only for cheerleading and fairytales.

There is and can be no "fact" regarding the outcome of Mendenhall's career since it hasn't happened yet but as I said I stand behind my opinion. If I'm wrong I will happily eat crow, but I'm sure if you are wrong that you will make no such apology for your unwarranted personal attack.


5 PLAYS....5 PLAYS......Where are my 5 damn plays????

5 magical plays anaylsed with reason that substantiate your claims and you get your apology. I am reasonable enough to acknowledge greatness.

Question: Do you have similiar discussions on gamer boards about the ratings of the running backs in Madden 2010? It must really be heart breaking to have your mancrush outranked by a guy who just got cut from the steelers.

http://espn.go.com/videogames/features/madden/madden10?teamId=29


Good day MR U.F. Nuckle

lamberts-lost-tooth
10-05-2009, 10:11 AM
Anyone else think that Uncle F**k Nuckle will not come back and admit he was wrong?

Originally Posted by UltimateFootballNetwork
It only took me about 5 carries to see that Mendenhall has no vision and doesn't like getting hit. So it's my PREDICTION that Mendenhall is a bust.

....just obvious from watching a RB who has no vision and doesn't like to get hit. He won't be a very good NFL RB and I'm happy to make that prediction and stand behind it.

If I'm wrong I will happily eat crow.

X-Terminator
10-05-2009, 10:30 AM
Anyone else think that Uncle F**k Nuckle will not come back and admit he was wrong?

Probably not, but I hope he does. I need to release some aggression and frustration by biotchslapping him around some more!

lamberts-lost-tooth
10-05-2009, 10:43 AM
Probably not, but I hope he does. I need to release some aggression and frustration by biotchslapping him around some more!

I'm willing to bet that he will try saying..."B-B-But its only one game." Unfortunately for him, he set the standard by proclaiming him a bust after "5 carries".

revefsreleets
10-05-2009, 10:51 AM
Where has this nitwit been anyway?

Problem with him is he's used to being surrounded by yes men and sycophants in his professional life, so he began to believe that any prognostication of his, no matter how short-sighted or ridiculous, was foolproof...

Fail.

Steeldude
10-05-2009, 11:12 AM
mendenhall a bust - jury is out
mendenhall is not a bust - jury is still out

i want to see the O-line do well against better competition.

while i feel the O-line deserves most of the credit, mendenhall did move well and attack. he does need to get rid of that spin move :smile:

Kvnfaber
10-05-2009, 11:52 AM
mendenhall a bust - jury is out
mendenhall is not a bust - jury is still out

i want to see the O-line do well against better competition.

while i feel the O-line deserves most of the credit, mendenhall did move well and attack. he does need to get rid of that spin move :smile:

The spin move worked wonders a few times, but he does do it too much. Sooner or later he will get speared in the back and it might make him change his mind about spinning every chance he gets.

The other thing is that when he is making big cuts, he wags the ball out too far from his body. This could be an issue with a ball-hawking defense like Baltimore.

Overall though, I was very impressed! He finally came out wanting to deliver the blows instead of taking them. I think Tomlin really pulled the strings right with him and hopefully Mendy continues to progress and get better.

fansince'76
10-05-2009, 12:04 PM
Where has this nitwit been anyway?

Better question is, who cares?

Steeldude
10-05-2009, 12:08 PM
The other thing is that when he is making big cuts, he wags the ball out too far from his body. This could be an issue with a ball-hawking defense like Baltimore

agreed. i believe that was one of the concerns in college and last year(practice).

it looks like parker is back as the starter. i wonder if they will give at least 10 to 12 carries to mendenhall next week.

Indo
10-05-2009, 12:54 PM
Make no mistake,
UFN will be back stating that MeMo's halfback pass shows that he, beyond ANY shadow of a doubt, should be moved to QB NOW, replacing Ben as the worthless, overrated, QB that he is.

In addition, we will be convinced through the exceptional football knowledge and debating ability of UFN that, had MeMo gotten as many touches as Mendy, he would have gained nearly 500 yards (not a measly 166) and CLEARLY deserves to be the #1 RB as well as the QB. The standard Steelers play could then consist of MeMo taking the snap under center, handing-off to himself, where he then throws a halfback pass to HIMSELF streaking down the sideline, having beaten all 11 D-backs that dare to oppose him.

(on a serious note, MeMo was awesome)

The_WARDen
10-05-2009, 02:53 PM
just curious, is this attacking the post or the poster?

:popcorn:

revefsreleets
10-05-2009, 02:56 PM
Make no mistake,
UFN will be back stating that MeMo's halfback pass shows that he, beyond ANY shadow of a doubt, should be moved to QB NOW, replacing Ben as the worthless, overrated, QB that he is.



He'll have "statistical analysis" that proves as much. Let me see if I can emulate what we're likely to hear...

UFN: With his one complete pass attempt, Mewelde Moore clearly demonstrated that the Steelers offense is MOST effective with him playing QB. Why? Let's examine this statistical analysis of mine.

On 99% of the Steelers plays, The do not properly utilize Moore and DO NOT throw let him throw the ball into the endzone, and 99% of those plays result in them not scoring. HOWEVER, when they let Moore throw the ball, there is only one result: He throws TD passes! Look at his completion percentage. It's 100%! Look at his QBR! It's 131.3, higher than Ben's! (That's a real number by the way...MM had a 131.3 to Ben's 128.9). Therefore, and in closing, IF the Steelers played Mewelde Moore at QB, they would score EVERY time he threw the ball, so they should bench Ben and start MM.

Don't argue with me, I run a football site and I'm never wrong!

Or, you know, something like that...

HometownGal
10-05-2009, 03:08 PM
just curious, is this attacking the post or the poster?

:popcorn:

I had the same gory thought. :rolleyes:

Folks - can we please stop with the jabs and mockery around here? If you don't like or agree with something another member posts- go after the content of the post and leave the personal jabs out of it.

revefsreleets
10-05-2009, 03:30 PM
It would be attacking the poster if we just said "UFN is an idiot" (or in the case of another particularly obtuse poster, saying "You're a bitch!).

It's not that...we are insinuating implied idiocy and backing that assertion with some information and analysis...ergo, we ARE "attacking the post" with the inevitable collateral damage that results when the poster says idiotic things repeatedly. In this case the post and the poster are hopelessly entangled in a web of senselessness and it's simply too difficult to dislodge one from the other...

fansince'76
11-10-2009, 08:09 AM
No, that's just obvious from watching a RB who has no vision and doesn't like to get hit. He won't be a very good NFL RB and I'm happy to make that prediction and stand behind it.

Let's see - in the last two games against the 6th-ranked and 8th-ranked run defenses in the league, respectively:

10 rushes, 69 yards, 6.9 YPC

22 rushes, 155 yards, 7.0 YPC

Fail. Again.

X-Terminator
11-10-2009, 10:15 AM
What? Mr. U.F. Nuckle was dead wrong? Surely you jest!










:rofl::toofunny::toofunny:

Oh man, I want him to come back just for a day, so we can all give him the cyber-kick in his non-existent junk that he deserves!

El-Gonzo Jackson
11-10-2009, 10:25 AM
Nice pickup on the thread 76....I forgot about this one. The kid definately doesnt lack vision and judging by blitz pickup, he doesnt mind contact either.

I thought that Jonathan Stewart, Mendenhall, Forte, THEN Darren McFadden would be the best NFL ready RB's in their draft year. Guess I missed on Chris Johnson, but still stand by Stewart, Mendenhall and Forte.

Indo
11-10-2009, 12:07 PM
Ohhhhh Sure.

I get berated for "jabs and mockery", but it's OK when certain "others" do it.... :flap: