ForceEight

Peyton can't be a WR. He runs like my great-grandmother.

It's not as if this is the first game all season that Rolle has missed. I think he's a more important loss than Suggs, but I think we'll be able to handle it. If Washington is on his game (as he has been, lately), I have confidence in the unit.

I'm not concerned with pairing Flacco with an immediately talented receiver. I don't think he needs that, and I don't think this will be the sort of offense where that happens. Honestly, I'd rather see one of the linebackers taken, because there's exponentially more value there than with someone like DHB or Harvin, especially considering that it'd save us from resigning at least one of the free agent LBs. There's no player I want more than Laurinaitis. I only mention him because he's possibly been leapfrogged perceptually, and I'm confident that he'll be a fantastic NFL player.

I'll be going to one or the other. Though I'd prefer BWI to Owings Mills.

Trade Reed for Peyton Manning, put Leonhard at FS, then put both Flacco and Smith out at WR where they belong. Problem solved!

Meanwhile, I'm still waiting for the evidence that (since this is your only argument) Leonhard is somehow better at this than Landry.

I hope he does, because I want him the least. I'm not particularly worried about WRs. There are other positions I'd be at least as happy filling.

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=3835065

Agreed. I think it's better if the Eagles win either way. They'd be a better matchup for us, and a tougher opponent for the Steelers, should they win.

Which is what led me to the conclusion that he might have been a decoy.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=3835911

Unless he's still injured, which I think might be the case. He didn't seem like much more than a decoy last week.

I missed seven games at original broadcast, but watched all but one of them sometime later during the week. Meanwhile, if you honestly want to use the greatest defensive player in NFL history as the atypical example, feel free, but we all know that there are prototypical sizes for each position for a reason. You are completely incorrect in stating that Lewis' numbers say he's far from the best; that's simply stretching your argument way too far, buddy. He consistently is in the top ten for tackles, and his sacks and interceptions bring further merit to his skill. That's not my argument, though, and it's not yours. You are suggesting that Leonhard has some type of fundamental motivation or emotional skill that makes the players around him better. You're also suggesting, then, that Landry doesn't. And that you're somehow able to distinguish this when no one else can. Ignore all the other thing I said earlier, and prove to me how this is the case. Prove to me how Leonhard makes the players around him better, and how Landry doesn't. You certainly can't use statistics as reasoning, here, because they tell a different tale. I look forward to your reply.

I didn't say they told the full story. However, I'd love for you to provide your evidence for the rest of the story. Oh, wait, you "have that feeling." I never backed up my support of Boller with statistical evidence. :lol:

:lol:! Based on what? The simple fact is that my argument is based on tangible and scientific knowledge. Yours is based on something that, not only can't be proven, but doesn't even exist. How does Leonhard make the team better? Even if he did, how can you possibly argue that Landry doesn't? Oh, because you just "get that feeling"? Landry is statistically and prototypically better than Leonhard. The best argument you can come up with for Leonhard is that he "makes the team better," when the team is actually doing worse than when Landry was the starter? Yeah, I'm the one that's full of it. :lol:

I'm not talking about your perception. I'm talking about perception in general. Your perception is skewed, because as far as this argument is concerned (because Leonhard isn't a feared presence or a renowned motivator), statistics do tell the whole story. Those "intangibles" you say aren't accounted for are more than accounted for. They're called interceptions, fumbles, sacks, etc. Those are the factors involved as to, right now, classifying Flacco as an average quarterback. Those are accounted for by the statistics Landry and Leonhard both accumulate. How many passes defensed and interceptions does Leonhard have when the ball is thrown in his direction? How many of his tackles were inside the box? How many were 25 yards from the line of scrimmage? Everything is accounted for, as far as the comparison is concerned. Presence included, Landry comes out the winner. Back to your mention of money, I never said that he'd command top dollar. Quoting myself, I said that he'd make "good money." And he will. He's a good, solid player who deserves a starting job in this league. However, Dawan Landry is a better player, and has the starting job here in Baltimore.

When your perception is based on makes the difference. Your perception is based on emotions and television. The stats state a different opinion. Your Flacco example is excellent. His numbers state that he's an average NFL QB (thus far), at best. Our emotions tell us that he's very good. Why? Because we haven't had someone of even his talent for years. The statistics tell us how he really did, but our emotions get in the way. The statistics tell us that Landry is a better player. But the gritty and unexpected effort of Leonhard tells us that he's a much better player than the facts do. If you want to discount huge rushing games for Leonhard, why doesn't Landry get the same benefit? You're digging a hole out here in the middle of nowhere, and it's getting you just that. Nowhere. Landry is the better strong safety.

I'm done arguing what you guys "remember" about Landry and the delusions of grandeur you've drawn up about Leonhard. He is a solid, fast player. Absolutely. He knows a lot about our defense (comparisons to what Reed and Lewis know, though, is just as absurd as the earlier comment that he tackles better than them). However, his performance this season overrates his overall ability and talent at the position he's not well-suited to play. He's the Troy Smith to Landry's Joe Flacco. In Buffalo, he was a free safety. With his size and speed, that's what he's best suited to play. As a strong safety, he's unable to play as much as necessary in the box and make the necessary tackles on tailbacks. He really hasn't done that this season, either. Leonhard has one career sack in four seasons (54 games played, 20 started). Landry has four sacks (34 games played, 32 started). Leonhard has three career INTs and nine career passes defensed; Landry has 5 INTs and 12 passes defensed. Leonhard has 141 career tackles (2.61 per game), including 111 solo tackles (2.06 per game); Landry has 162 career tackles (4.76 per game), including 123 solo tackles (3.62 per game). If I consider only Leonhard's games in which he's started, just this season (to remove better/worse defense bias), these are his numbers: 67 tackles, 53 solo (5.15 per game, 4.07 per game). One sack. One interception. Five passes defensed. Especially considering the injury-riddled defense that Landry was part of in 2007, the personal statistics are similar. Let's look at team stats, again considering the below-average year that was 2007 for the entire team. In 2006 and 2007, the Ravens (with Landry) combined to allow 77.0 rushing yards per game. In 2008, in Leonhard's 13 games as starter, they gave up 84.1 rushing yards per game. In 2006 and 2007, the Ravens (with Landry) allowed 188.2 and 222.3 (205.3 combined) passing yards per game. They've allowed 194.2 yards passing per game in Leonhard's 13 starts. With healthy teams around them, Landry's stats are superior to Leonhard's. They balance out when considering how horrible last season was. If you focus on that, as well as the fact that Landry is the prototypical strong safety while Leonhard is not, it is clear who should be our starter. That is, unless you "remember" differently.

My dad took me to my first game in 2002. Against the Saints. (Yeah, we obviously don't get together very well.)

Usualy I'd be somewhat confident in Walker, but Holmes and Washington are both speedy; we're much better suited with Rolle covering them. Honestly, I think it's more important that we have Rolle than Suggs.

Welcome! Glad you stumbled in.

Twin Kiss! My parents used to take us out there every weekend. Very nice piece, boss. I'm really, really, really sorry to hear it.

Should've happened last year. Not really worried.

You do realize that you're calling a 180 pound man the best tackler on our team, right? Using poor form on a play that should've meant nothing doesn't make you a poor tackler. I don't know whether you're trapped in Landry's basement, or Leonhard's paying you, or what, but anyone with common sense can statistically and logically comprehend that Landry is a more physically skilled tackler, and a better safety. But what do I know? You're the expert who thinks the little guy can tackle better than our half-dozen Pro Bowlers. Cleet, I know what you mean. If he hesitates at first, that's fine. That's what training camp is for. He'll remember to be more technical in his moves, but the instincts of playing will keep him at his best talent. I'm really not at all worried. But we'll see.