Page 4 of 14 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 138

Thread: Willie PArker

  1. #31

    Re: Willie PArker

    Also, i think a lot of the angst on these boards comes from the fact that we are tryign to create the perfect ballplayer on these threads. Sure willie has break away speed, but if only he could break the tackles . . . Sure, ben makes plays downfield, but if only he could hit his running backs more . . . I wish Ben would hold onto the ball longer and check down . . . I wish Ben would get rid of the ball sooner . . . Everyones a friggen expert. How about this, Man, I really wish Terry Bradshaw wouldn't have been so injury prone and interception prone, a good quarterback would have won 10 super bowls with that defense.

  2. #32
    Hall of Famer
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    3,113

    Re: Willie PArker

    Personally, I like #22 better ...........................



  3. #33

    Re: Willie PArker

    LOL...no we just want a running back who can do more than break off 60 yarders. There is alot more to this thing called running the ball than bursting through wide open holes for TDs.

  4. #34

    Re: Willie PArker

    All of this Willie Parker talk helped me remember a time when the Browns
    had drafted RB Willie Green. After the first two games where he like
    completely sucked, I went on Browns Message board and started saying
    he was a bust. I acted real serious, and was fairly clever in not looking
    like a troll. Man , were they pissed.

  5. #35
    Hall of Famer ikestops85's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    3,287

    Re: Willie PArker

    Quote Originally Posted by Mr Smartmonies
    a) I never said get rid of wilie. I said he is a situational back.
    I don't believe I ever suggested you want to get rid of Willie. He is a situational back ... the situation he seems to do well in is "Starter". Are there more "complete" backs in the league? Most definitely. Is Willie a top 10 back in the league? Again, most definitely.
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr Smartmonies
    b) your comparing LT's worst season to Parkers' best season
    Really? I know we must have different criteria on how to measure running backs and how successful their seasons are. For running backs I will use rushing yards as probably the most important criteria. Certainly not the only criteria but the most important. Given that 2007 was not his worst season. He didn't do as well in 2001 and 2004. He put up basically the same numbers in 2005.
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr Smartmonies
    c) LT has 61 TD's last 3 years. Parker 19.
    YOU put out the criteria with your 4 charts ... not me. By the way, can you post the link to that data? Thanks. I can use it on the bengals smack board.
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr Smartmonies
    d) Tomlinson made up for his poor 1st down carries. On 2nd down he averaged 4.6 YPC. Parker fell even further to 3.9. LT was in the top 10 on 2nd down. Parker raned 27th on 2nd.
    Once again ... it was YOU who picked the criteria.
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr Smartmonies
    e) Receving Yards - LT has 3 times the amount of Receving yards.
    See answer to "d" above.
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr Smartmonies
    F) Every team focuses on LT. Gameplans are drawn up focusing on LT. Coaches lose sleep over LT. Teams are more concerned with Ben then they are parker at this point in their careers. Lt finds the Endzone. Parker wouldn't know what it is if you landed a plane there.
    The last I looked the vast majority of teams play the steelers with 8 in the box. Why? Do you think it has something to do with our running game? Because of Ben's success last year I think that will change and it only bodes well for our running game.

    What it comes down to is you picked criteria to make Willie look bad. I used that same criteria to show Willie was better than the league's premier back. Now you want to change the criteria. Look, what this comes down to is we all hope Mendy comes in and becomes a superstar. The difference is if he doesn't and Willie remains the #1 back some of us will still be happy and others, like yourself, won't.
    <a href=http://seahawknationblog.com/files/2011/02/roger-goodell.jpg target=_blank>http://seahawknationblog.com/files/2...er-goodell.jpg</a>

  6. #36
    LasVegasGuy
    Guest

    Re: Willie PArker

    Quote Originally Posted by BURGH86STEEL
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr Smartmonies
    You guys all want to focus on the Stuffs and not anything else I posted.
    And because of that your all missing the point. Yes , Tomlinson had few more stuffs
    than parker. But he made up for those stuffs with a higher percentage of 10+ yard runs. Not to mention receiving Yards yards. Peterson is another one. Look at his 10+ yards run percentage. If Parker was breaking that many 10+ yard runs per his carries, we wouldn't concern ourselves as much with the stuffs. Read the whole post Fella's. Don't shoot the messenger. The Fact is Parker doesn't do anything especially well. Not on 1st and 2nd down. Not in the red zone. Not as a pass receiving threat. Not on long runs. He gets stuffed alot. We can do better at that postion.

    The problem is you selectively picked stats to prove a point. You did not take other things into consideration. For instance, as some others have mentioned you blame Parker and not the Oline. When Ben takes a sack its the Oline and protection.

    Maybe Ben is getting killed because we don't have a threat to run. Teams know they can send 4 or 5 to stop Willie and drop back 6 into coverage. This eliminates any quick throws for Ben plus it's harder for receivers to get open when they are double teamed. Ben is then forced to hold the ball longer thus getting sacked. I think the O-Line is fine and so is Ben. You will see a much improved team upfront once we establish a legitimate threat in the backfield. As long as Willie is back there we aint going anywhere fast unless it's to the outside.

  7. #37
    Legend
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Stuart, FL
    Posts
    9,215

    Re: Willie PArker

    I'm now completely convinced some of you don't watch the games. Opposing defenses only sending 4 or 5 to stop the run while dropping the rest into coverage?

    Once again Ike, nicely done!

  8. #38

    Re: Willie PArker

    [quote=ikestops85]
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr Smartmonies
    a) I never said get rid of wilie. I said he is a situational back.
    I don't believe I ever suggested you want to get rid of Willie. He is a situational back ... the situation he seems to do well in is "Starter". Are there more "complete" backs in the league? Most definitely. Is Willie a top 10 back in the league? Again, most definitely.
    Quote Originally Posted by "Mr Smartmonies":2wj2lg07
    b) your comparing LT's worst season to Parkers' best season
    Really? I know we must have different criteria on how to measure running backs and how successful their seasons are. For running backs I will use rushing yards as probably the most important criteria. Certainly not the only criteria but the most important. Given that 2007 was not his worst season. He didn't do as well in 2001 and 2004. He put up basically the same numbers in 2005.
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr Smartmonies
    c) LT has 61 TD's last 3 years. Parker 19.
    YOU put out the criteria with your 4 charts ... not me. By the way, can you post the link to that data? Thanks. I can use it on the bengals smack board.
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr Smartmonies
    d) Tomlinson made up for his poor 1st down carries. On 2nd down he averaged 4.6 YPC. Parker fell even further to 3.9. LT was in the top 10 on 2nd down. Parker raned 27th on 2nd.
    Once again ... it was YOU who picked the criteria.
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr Smartmonies
    e) Receving Yards - LT has 3 times the amount of Receving yards.
    See answer to "d" above.
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr Smartmonies
    F) Every team focuses on LT. Gameplans are drawn up focusing on LT. Coaches lose sleep over LT. Teams are more concerned with Ben then they are parker at this point in their careers. Lt finds the Endzone. Parker wouldn't know what it is if you landed a plane there.
    The last I looked the vast majority of teams play the steelers with 8 in the box. Why? Do you think it has something to do with our running game? Because of Ben's success last year I think that will change and it only bodes well for our running game.

    What it comes down to is you picked criteria to make Willie look bad. I used that same criteria to show Willie was better than the league's premier back. Now you want to change the criteria. Look, what this comes down to is we all hope Mendy comes in and becomes a superstar. The difference is if he doesn't and Willie remains the #1 back some of us will still be happy and others, like yourself, won't.
    [/quote:2wj2lg07]

    Ok, from top to bottom.

    If you want to judge a RB just on Over all rushing yards. then I can not argue with you.
    But if you would like to compare RB's on Yardage per carry, then Parker is Flat average at best. The over all yards he racked up, came from the extreme amount of attempts per game. Consider that Peterson had nearly as many yards and about 100 less attempts. I measure things on efficiency, because I want to know the true worth of a player. Over all yards means little. I guess you probably like Jon Kitna becuase he passes for a lot of yards. I'm not going to explain this any further.

    I did not post these stats to compare LT. If you want to compare backs, thats why I posted the other stats. I said in the original post that certain backs will have more stuffs and more longer runs, while other backs will have fewer stuffs and fewer long runs.
    Did you read that? Tomlinson had 2 more stuffs on the season then Parker. There was not much difference. But Tomlinson is near the top in the league in rushes 10+ yards.
    Not to mention his receiving stats, TD's scored. Etc.

    Finally, Ben Roethlisberger had the best 1st down passing rating, yards per attempt, completion percentage , in 2004. If it took teams 4 years to find out he is pretty good, then that is sad. Roethlisberger saw a TON of cover 2 last year. Teams are only concerned about the Steeler running game because they run the ball a lot. Not becuase their all that good at it. Its about efficiency.

  9. #39
    Hall of Famer
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Tampa, Florida, United States
    Posts
    3,756

    Re: Willie PArker

    MSM didn't we run the ball 62% of the time in '04? I would hope that Ben took advantage of the instances where he could throw the ball on 1st down.
    I've said it before and I'll say it again, teams didn't take Ben seriously until THIS season. Why? 2004 they figured he'd find ways to lose, being a rookie and all. that and the fact that we ran the ball 62% of the time.
    2005 again, he didn't have a stellar year. he was still learning but getting better.
    2006 face plant off car, appendectomy, and concussion made teams think maybe he was playing it safe. plus the fact that he was sacked 40+ times made people think that maybe he was rattled.
    2007 first few games teams focused on the running game. in fact I would say, HALF the season they focused on the running game. Then when teams figured out that he was on fire, they adjusted and that's why we started off hot and finished cold.
    http://jeromiandbrittany.blogspot.com/

    Earn Some Bitcoins


    PBMining

    http://www.qoinpro.com/91f8fc96f7dfd461f6483ab3950deccc

    I am paying for my honeymoon using bitcoins.
    1PQsjF9rQqEWF8RfPzczyqCW6ULu1nZ3iu

  10. #40

    Re: Willie PArker

    Quote Originally Posted by birtikidis
    MSM didn't we run the ball 62% of the time in '04? I would hope that Ben took advantage of the instances where he could throw the ball on 1st down.
    I've said it before and I'll say it again, teams didn't take Ben seriously until THIS season. Why? 2004 they figured he'd find ways to lose, being a rookie and all. that and the fact that we ran the ball 62% of the time.
    2005 again, he didn't have a stellar year. he was still learning but getting better.
    2006 face plant off car, appendectomy, and concussion made teams think maybe he was playing it safe. plus the fact that he was sacked 40+ times made people think that maybe he was rattled.
    2007 first few games teams focused on the running game. in fact I would say, HALF the season they focused on the running game. Then when teams figured out that he was on fire, they adjusted and that's why we started off hot and finished cold.
    Birt, i have been thru this with you before. Your just plain wrong. Your wrong. We ran the ball so much on 2004, because BEN WAS ****ING SPECATACULAR ON 1ST DOWN. WE GOT HUGE LEADS IN THE FIRST HALF. AND THEN COWHER SHUT IT THE FU CK DOWN AND BETTIS HAD 500 FUC KING YARDS IN THE 4TH QTR THAT YEAR.

    BEN HOLDS THE 2ND HIGHEST MOTHER ****ING ROAD PASSER RATING IN PLAYOFF ****ING HISTORY.

    IF TEAMS DIDN'T ****ING KNOW BY HIS 35 GAME OF HIS CAREER THAT HE NEEDEDTO BE STOPPED THEN THEY ARE A BUNCH OF STUPID ****S.

    STOP WITH THE NONSENSE ALREADY.

    2005 HE DIDN'T HAVE A STELLER YEAR? HE AVERAGE 8.9 FUC KING YARDS PER ATTEMPT AND IF YOU KNEW ANYTHING ABOUT ITS IMPORTANCE , YOU WOULDN'T BE WASTING MY TIME WITH STUPID SH IT LIKE THAT.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •