PDA

View Full Version : Roethlisberger...maybe top 10 in the league



Jigawatts
07-03-2009, 12:15 PM
Just some off season boredom.

I hope these two don't make a living doing this. :lol:

[youtube:fwczc9nx]<object width="560" height="340"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/5g2zBZmABCg&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/5g2zBZmABCg&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="560" height="340"></embed></object>[/youtube:fwczc9nx]

Jooser
07-03-2009, 12:22 PM
http://i743.photobucket.com/albums/xx78/turgsh01/196166386_56f4041858_o.jpg

I'd rate these two a 4. -just because I'm annoyed watching them right now.

Jigawatts
07-03-2009, 12:43 PM
I'd rate these two a 4. -just because I'm annoyed watching them right now.

That's about where I'd put them.

ramblinjim
07-03-2009, 03:45 PM
since there's no other real news out there and I have little other Steeler stuff to read / watch, I'm giving these guys a three. :Blah

Ben may be top 10. Wow. I want to know who the ten are that would prefer to keep who they currently have....

Flasteel
07-03-2009, 06:48 PM
http://i743.photobucket.com/albums/xx78/turgsh01/196166386_56f4041858_o.jpg

I'd rate these two a 4. -just because I'm annoyed watching them right now.

I'm not sure I like this scale. There is little correlation between douchebaggery and influence. Saying these guys are a level 4 douchebag doesn't do them justice. Where would you put a guy like Wydo for instance? He wields no influence yet is unquestionably a douchebag of the highest order.

Douchebag - noun
1. (slang) A jerk; a mean or rude person.
2. (slang) An idiot, a dim-witted person.
3. (slang) An individual who has an over-inflated sense of self worth, compounded by a low level of intelligence, behaving ridiculously in front of others with no sense of how moronic he appears.

BradshawsHairdresser
07-03-2009, 08:36 PM
Try top three...

skyhawk
07-03-2009, 09:36 PM
Um, that video totally sucked. Morons. I seriously wanted to smack him in the face so bad. Are you kidding me?

For Roethlisberger it's all about the receivers making plays? And he didnt make a great throw b/c he thought it was intercepted? What??

And here is the hall of famer Warner, who was completely absent for 3.5 quarters and he is the hall of famer with a receiver making him look good with those hands? And it's all about Holmes and not Big Ben? What are these guys smoking? :moon

I can tell both of these nerds have never played competitive sports in their life and were always picked last in school.

ramblinjim
07-03-2009, 10:17 PM
Try top three...


:Agree This is where I would put him.

Uncle Rico
07-04-2009, 06:54 AM
The only thing that makes those two jokers' opinions more significant than any of ours is that they have a camera pointed at them.

Chachi
07-04-2009, 08:23 AM
"Give me a 'physical' break"? :?

Who says that?

But, I digress....
_________________________

What I'd like to ask these guys.....

Roethlisberger isn't "that good" (ie. overrated) because of the receivers around him, particularly one of his receivers, Santonio.

Ok, fine. Good point.

But let's use this standard on the other QB they referred to in this segment.

How much of Warner, the future HOFer in their eyes, is Boldin and Fitzgerald? How much of Warner was Isaac Bruce and Tory Holt?

Ben isn't that good because he has one good receiver? Sure.

But you elevate a guy who has had, not one pair of (possible) HOF receivers to work with in his career, but TWO?

What did Warner do when he worked with out a pair of speedy, big play threat receivers at his disposal? Think hard....

Yea....that's what I thought.
______________________

Now, don't think I'm trying to take anything away form Warner, I am just trying to get these guys use the same standard on Warner that they do to Ben.

And some of you might be thinking, "What about Ward? he's HOF material! That's a pair of (possible) HOF receivers right there." Yes, he is, IMO, but, no one would compare Ward with Bruce, or Holt, or Boldin or Fitzy. Hines is a different breed and not thought of as "big play threat".

snarky
07-04-2009, 09:01 AM
That's hilarious.

RuthlessBurgher
07-04-2009, 10:46 AM
Try top three...

Do you mean Ben is is a top three quarterback, or these guys are top three level douchebags on the Jooser Scale of Douchebaggery?

http://www.htzfm.com/files/htzfm/images/douche%20BAG.jpg

:lol:

BradshawsHairdresser
07-04-2009, 12:41 PM
Try top three...

Do you mean Ben is is a top three quarterback, or these guys are top three level douchebags on the Jooser Scale of Douchebaggery?

http://www.htzfm.com/files/htzfm/images/douche%20BAG.jpg

:lol:

Hmmm...since you put it that way...BOTH!!

Jooser
07-04-2009, 01:30 PM
"Give me a 'physical' break"? :?

Who says that?

But, I digress....
_________________________

What I'd like to ask these guys.....

Roethlisberger isn't "that good" (ie. overrated) because of the receivers around him, particularly one of his receivers, Santonio.

Ok, fine. Good point.

But let's use this standard on the other QB they referred to in this segment.

How much of Warner, the future HOFer in their eyes, is Boldin and Fitzgerald? How much of Warner was Isaac Bruce and Tory Holt?

Ben isn't that good because he has one good receiver? Sure.

But you elevate a guy who has had, not one pair of (possible) HOF receivers to work with in his career, but TWO?

What did Warner do when he worked with out a pair of speedy, big play threat receivers at his disposal? Think hard....

Yea....that's what I thought.
______________________

Now, don't think I'm trying to take anything away form Warner, I am just trying to get these guys use the same standard on Warner that they do to Ben.

And some of you might be thinking, "What about Ward? he's HOF material! That's a pair of (possible) HOF receivers right there." Yes, he is, IMO, but, no one would compare Ward with Bruce, or Holt, or Boldin or Fitzy. Hines is a different breed and not thought of as "big play threat".

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v485/mazmik1028/approval.jpg
http://i42.photobucket.com/albums/e316/JAE005/approval.jpg

stlrz d
07-05-2009, 08:38 PM
All I had to see was the Lancaster, PA part.

These guys are Philly lovin' Pittsburgh haters.

Iron Shiek
07-06-2009, 09:59 AM
All I had to see was the Lancaster, PA part.

These guys are Philly lovin' Pittsburgh haters.

And jealous of having a "winner" at qb rather than Mr. McNabb and his gazillion chances at losing in the biggest games...

stlrz d
07-06-2009, 09:02 PM
[quote="stlrz d":ddlmn0z7]All I had to see was the Lancaster, PA part.

These guys are Philly lovin' Pittsburgh haters.

And jealous of having a "winner" at qb rather than Mr. McNabb and his gazillion chances at losing in the biggest games...[/quote:ddlmn0z7]

QFT

proudpittsburgher
07-12-2009, 09:02 PM
was watching nfl network yesterday morning and Warren Sapp listed the top five quarterbacks in the NFL right now.

1. Tom Brady
2. Peyton Manning
3. Drew Brees
4. Phillip Rivers
5. Jay Cutler :roll: :shock:

TallyStiller
07-14-2009, 06:19 PM
Lot of guys play fantasy football. Troy Aikman wasn't much of a fantasy QB. Terry Bradshaw's numbers didn't match up real well in that regard, either... SB XIII was the first time in his CAREER that he threw for 300+ in a game - I know this because they must've said it 15 times on the game broadcast. You can have Drew Brees and his 400 yard passing games. Throw in Fran Tarkenton, Dan Marino, and Dan Fouts, too, while you're at it. Give me a winner over a pinball machine every time.