Jamarcus Russell Signed

Talk about any other sports here.

Moderators: Mr. Crackerz, JREED, Guybrush, hobbes

User avatar
Franchise Player
Posts: 9202
Joined: Mon Aug 14, 2006 11:07 pm
Location: Land of the Lacob.
Poster Credit: 0
PostPosted: Fri Sep 14, 2007 10:32 pm
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!!!


Yeah, I've always liked the Seahawks(unless they're playing the Niners that certain week). I like Lofa, he's going to be a HOF in my opinion. Sure, I hate him because he went to USC, but I can't deny his talent. In franchise mode of Madden 07, I'd see Tatupu in the free agency after a few years and I'd ensure I sign him.
Don't hate yourself in the morning... sleep 'til noon.
User avatar
Franchise Player
Posts: 5756
Joined: Mon Jul 02, 2007 5:40 am
Location: On the couch watching sports
Poster Credit: 0
PostPosted: Fri Sep 14, 2007 10:44 pm
He's been playing for like three years and he is going to be a hall of famer...? :?
2007 - GoldenStWarriors.com "Rookie of the Year"
User avatar
Franchise Player
Posts: 9202
Joined: Mon Aug 14, 2006 11:07 pm
Location: Land of the Lacob.
Poster Credit: 0
PostPosted: Fri Sep 14, 2007 10:46 pm
sfsfsfgiants wrote:He's been playing for like three years and he is going to be a hall of famer...? :?


IMO, yeah. Besides, you said Willis has dominated so far and he's played only one game. And don't include the preseason/training camp.
Don't hate yourself in the morning... sleep 'til noon.
User avatar
Franchise Player
Posts: 5756
Joined: Mon Jul 02, 2007 5:40 am
Location: On the couch watching sports
Poster Credit: 0
PostPosted: Fri Sep 14, 2007 10:47 pm
I never said that Willis is a hall of famer though. I said that Willis has a chance to be a mega star, but I never said that he is going to be a hall of famer. So much can happen in ten years.
2007 - GoldenStWarriors.com "Rookie of the Year"
User avatar
Franchise Player
Posts: 9202
Joined: Mon Aug 14, 2006 11:07 pm
Location: Land of the Lacob.
Poster Credit: 0
PostPosted: Fri Sep 14, 2007 10:49 pm
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.

And of course, at the pace Willis is going... he's a future HOF too. :wink: :D
Don't hate yourself in the morning... sleep 'til noon.
User avatar
Franchise Player
Posts: 5756
Joined: Mon Jul 02, 2007 5:40 am
Location: On the couch watching sports
Poster Credit: 0
PostPosted: Fri Sep 14, 2007 10:59 pm
Saying "at the pace he is going" is one phraise that I hate. At the pace Griffey was going, he was going to hit 900 homers. At the pace that Jason Schmidt was pitching, he was going to win 19 games a year for the next five years. I know that Tatupu is a great player, and I would also rank him at the top of the NFC West, but I just am not ready to call him a hall of famer.
2007 - GoldenStWarriors.com "Rookie of the Year"
User avatar
Hall of Famer
Posts: 18461
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:48 am
Location: Somewhere in this site...
Poster Credit: -4
PostPosted: Sat Sep 15, 2007 2:28 am
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.


I'd bet on it, too. There are very few MLBs better than Tatupu in the league. Ray Lewis (arguably, as he's lost a step, or two, in the last few years), Urlacher... who else?
User avatar
Franchise Player
Posts: 5756
Joined: Mon Jul 02, 2007 5:40 am
Location: On the couch watching sports
Poster Credit: 0
PostPosted: Sat Sep 15, 2007 9:06 am
Keith Brooking and Zack Thomas have both been putting up monster stats for a long time.
2007 - GoldenStWarriors.com "Rookie of the Year"
User avatar
Hall of Famer
Posts: 18461
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:48 am
Location: Somewhere in this site...
Poster Credit: -4
PostPosted: Sat Sep 15, 2007 9:11 am
sfsfsfgiants wrote:Keith Brooking and Zack Thomas have both been putting up monster stats for a long time.


Yeah, well. I've always thought Brooking was a bit overrated. As for Zach, he's great, but he's also getting old. He also lacks the playoff wins.
User avatar
Franchise Player
Posts: 5756
Joined: Mon Jul 02, 2007 5:40 am
Location: On the couch watching sports
Poster Credit: 0
PostPosted: Sat Sep 15, 2007 9:20 am
Keith has gotten over 100 tackles in six strait years. Zach Thomas has had over 100 tackles in every year, ten, except one, which he got 99. Tatupu has played two full years, and yes, he's gotten 100 tackles in both of them, but a lot can happen. Yeah, he is a good player, but he is a far cry from a hall of famer.
2007 - GoldenStWarriors.com "Rookie of the Year"
User avatar
Franchise Player
Posts: 5850
Joined: Fri May 14, 2004 5:05 am
Location: Brisbane
Poster Credit: 31
PostPosted: Sat Sep 15, 2007 10:01 am
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.


Thanks for clearing the air on that, i too believe the same views as you but only my anger is directed at 49'ers fans for turning there nose at the raider nation as if they think they are better then us
(Blue collar vs White Collar) .
i won't preach to you to why my franchise is better cause it'll be a lost cause and when your loyal to something you stay loyal.

All Star
Posts: 3317
Joined: Fri Apr 06, 2007 2:33 pm
Location: the STACK
Poster Credit: 0
PostPosted: Sat Sep 15, 2007 2:06 pm
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.
"the victorious warrior wins first, and then goes to war; the defeated warrior goes to war first, and hopes to win."- The Art of War

Image
User avatar
Franchise Player
Posts: 9202
Joined: Mon Aug 14, 2006 11:07 pm
Location: Land of the Lacob.
Poster Credit: 0
PostPosted: Sat Sep 15, 2007 2:51 pm
With the Cowboys and Bucs, he wore a number in the 80's. With the Panthers, he wore 19 I think.
Don't hate yourself in the morning... sleep 'til noon.

All Star
Posts: 3317
Joined: Fri Apr 06, 2007 2:33 pm
Location: the STACK
Poster Credit: 0
PostPosted: Sat Sep 15, 2007 3:55 pm
xbaywarrior wrote:With the Cowboys and Bucs, he wore a number in the 80's. With the Panthers, he wore 19 I think.


actually im pretty sure he wore 19 thru his whole career. i know for a fact he wore 19 on the jets and that had to be before 2004.
"the victorious warrior wins first, and then goes to war; the defeated warrior goes to war first, and hopes to win."- The Art of War

Image
User avatar
Franchise Player
Posts: 5756
Joined: Mon Jul 02, 2007 5:40 am
Location: On the couch watching sports
Poster Credit: 0
PostPosted: Sat Sep 15, 2007 4:12 pm
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.


Like I said, the only way that that would work is if his team had every 80 filled. I know for a fact that in the 2004 era, they changed it. Randy Moss' first year with the Raiders, actually. I remember that he and Keyshawn were the first ones to do it. I'm too lazy to check out what year it was, but someone else can. :mrgreen: Even Jerry Rice took 18 or something when he was on Denver.
2007 - GoldenStWarriors.com "Rookie of the Year"
PreviousNext

Return to Sports Board

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest