papasmurfbell

Finally Steve is saying the real problem. The rule book is to think. With their profits and the states deficits sounds like a great plan.

And it sounds like Steve is all for corporate welfare.

Don't forget I was the one who said it first. I think ppl just get mad at Preston pointing out the truth.

That don't sound good. Ozzie says they are going to make a plan about trying to make up a team with Joe's contract as is as a possibility.

What? A guy gets a susp. OK it happens. Secondly you can't be punished twice in the NFL by CBA rules. A judge clearly said that in th eRay Rice case.

Williams is the guy who can be the perennial PB TE. Gilmore will just be solid.

Now the question is what are they going to do with 3 legit TEs? You can't have all three active on game days. I would look to trade one after next season. I would say Boyle.

I said he would be special when they got him. This yr for him is a learning yr. By 2017 I think he is the real deal and killing Ds.

Yeah it turned out to not be true.

That is the point. Kap was able to successfully use Q while Joe's use was done in a mediocre way. In 2011 2012 Q had other weapons in Rice, Torrey, and Pitta. Everyone keeps yelling that Torrey is great in the argument about lacking Perriman. In 2010 there was Mason, Rice, Willis, Heap, Pitta, and Le'Ron. There have been weapons here. And Joe doesn't use them well. Yeah when you take the games in the schedule it makes the argument Joe had a harder schedule moot.

Honestly the Hardest part of the season was in the back end. It was front ended by not the greatest teams. So you say the D had a hand in the wins in the back end? Oh so when Joe gets all thr credit for the wins in the past I am not seeing the D getting any credit then. You can't have it both ways.

But Q did get his yds with Kap. http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/stats/_/id/4512/anquan-boldin In 2013 and 2014 Kap was the QB.

What is SOS?

Well why is it Q was a 1000 yd WR in Zona and stopped here. He got to SF and he was a 1000 yd WR again. I would put the winning at the feet of the team as a whole. I think Joe was more riding some coat tails.

If Joe's win percentage goes for 16 games it is a 4.8 wins. If you go with what was on the field for the last 6 games it is 5.328 wins. Really the question is less why Joe played a little worse than his replacements. But why wasn't he so much better than them? Something else I found really interesting from this weekend. I was watching the game in a bar. the game next to the TV I was watching had the Was Dal game on. During the game Cousins broke the single season passing yards record with 4166 yds. What shocked me was who had held the record. Jay Schroeder had 4109 in 1986. Before the rule change Schroeder broke 4000 yds. Why can't Joe do that with the easier passing rules?

Joe was a turnover machine like Schaub turned out to be. But with Mallett the picks went down. That is probably why the win percentage is a little better,

It is beyond me. I can't talk theoretical physics either.

Joe won 3 in 10 games. That is a .300 win percentage. Without Joe they won 2 in 6 games. That is a .333 win percentage. Do you really want to argue math?

They won more without Joe and Justin.

He doesn't win that often. The 2000 team was all draft with key FA that were below market deals. Ozzie doesn't make this acquisitions anymore.

I get the above replacement but I don't get how you compare a player to some made up player.

I don't really get all the new stats so I will take your word on it.

Goff doesn't impress me at all.

They did it last yr.

They have to have it. There is a shot at the #1 seed. If they lose they could slide to #3 and lose the first round bye.