badabing8888 wrote:

xbaywarrior wrote:I think I'd take Lofa Tatupu over Kirk Morrison. He's shown to be more impressive thank Kirk. And I'm not being Raiders biased at all. I rarely give credit to Seahawks players... especially Julian Peterson.

The best MLB in the AFC/NFC West has to be either Morrison or Tatupu.

1. Lofa Tatupu
2. Kirk Morrison
3. P-Willis
4. Tinosamoa
5. Donnie Edwards
6. Chargers MLB
7. Cards MLB
8. Broncos MLB

But out of those top three, Willis and Tatupu are probably the smartest ones in coverage. They're both like QB's on defense. The difference between the two is that Willis is a tackling machine that reads coverages well and gets to the ball quick while Tatupu is more of a cover, hard hitting, goal line stopper MLB IMO.

Atta boy Xbay. I knew I liked you. Lofa is my boy!!!

sfsfsfgiants wrote:He's been playing for like three years and he is going to be a hall of famer...?

xbaywarrior wrote:True, but at the pace Tatupu is going... he's a future HOF. Though I'd say he'd have to wait double digit years after he's eligible to be allowed to the HOF.

sfsfsfgiants wrote:Keith Brooking and Zack Thomas have both been putting up monster stats for a long time.

sfsfsfgiants wrote:I do hate the Raiders, but not because I'm some university trash.. I hate the Raiders because I've noticed that for the most part, their fans are the most ignorant fans in the league. They act like they are so good, and they act like no one else matters. I gotten threatened a couple at a 49er-Raider game at San Francisco for just the fact that I am wearing a 49er shirt. I'm not saying that all fans are this way, but I'm saying it because more than there should be are. You are a Raider fan, I'm a 49er fan. We are going to have our differences, and I'm not going to bother fighting with you, as it is a lost cause. I do have friends that are Raider fans, and of course we disagree, but we dont fight, and you are just an instigator. I simply said that I dont think JaMarcus Russell is worth the money, as he is an unproven rookie with one good year of college under his belt. Maybe you took it the wrong way, I dont know, but I'm not attacking him, or you, so dont attack me. Mutual respect, man.



You dont need to like me. I know that there are probably a couple people on here that dont. As long as you dont attack me, I dont care if you dont like me.

I'm not trashing all Raider's fans. I'm trashing the stupid dumb ass fans. I know the 49ers have some, too, but not as many.

sfsfsfgiants wrote:it used to be that recievers and tight ends could only use 80-89, but they changed it in 2004 or 2005 that they could wear 10-19 as well. It was just getting too hard to get all the tight ends and recievers, as well as retired numbers, all within the 80's. Most teams will ask a player to use a number in the 80's if it's available, but if there isnt, a 10-19 number is next.

xbaywarrior wrote:With the Cowboys and Bucs, he wore a number in the 80's. With the Panthers, he wore 19 I think.

EMan32 wrote:

sfsfsfgiants wrote:it used to be that recievers and tight ends could only use 80-89, but they changed it in 2004 or 2005 that they could wear 10-19 as well. It was just getting too hard to get all the tight ends and recievers, as well as retired numbers, all within the 80's. Most teams will ask a player to use a number in the 80's if it's available, but if there isnt, a 10-19 number is next.

id swear keyshawn was wearing #19 before 2004...but in any case i didnt know that. thank you for enlightening me.