QB Controversy

You are being subjective in this though. How do you know that we did not catch some tendency that the corner had and exploited it when Smith had the long TD. Maybe we threw all that short stuff to set him up for the long pass. Anyway you can not discount it without knowing more about it than you do.

The bottom line is that the offense moved the ball better and scored more points with Vinnie playing.

 

Because I'm not clueless about the NFL. The CB is never just supposed to release a man deep unless he has safety help and a short zone responsibility. Hood had neither on that play, which is what made his decision all the more perplexing.

Yes, I can. You always want to pretend that I can't know things when it's obvious time and time again that I do. Because you lack the intellect to understand something does not mean that no one else can either, it just means that you're dumb. The sooner you realize that fact, the better you'll be able to adjust to your place in the world. But until then we'll continue to butt heads because you can't understand events of any significant complexity while other people can.

Two first downs in the first half, genius. How many times do people have to point that out to you? It's obvious that you're desperate to crow about something, anything, but it just looks pathetic at this point.

 

25 points for the game, over two hundred passing yards, no interceptions, completed over 60% of his passes. How stupid must you be not to be able to see how much better that is than Carr's stats.

 

29 of Vinny's 33 pass attempts were shorter than 10 yards. When you do that, you're going to complete a high percentage and you're generally going to avoid interceptions as well. With 6 minutes left in the game, we still trailed an Arizona team missing its top two quarterbacks, its leading receiver, and its first round tackle. The real question is how stupid must you be to think that was a good performance.

 

Carr only managed to score 13 points against a winless team that had been inept on defense and that lost its starting tailback the week before.

Vinnie put up 25 on a team that held the Steelers to 14 a couple of weeks ago and put up 4 sacks in the process.

 

Vinny did not put up 25, he put up 7. Carr did not put up 13, he put up 7. Giving Testaverde credit for DeAngelo's run just makes you look exceptionally retarded.

This is why people think that you are so stupid, Thelt, because you cannot grasp basic points no matter how often they're explained to you. Carr was not asked to throw much, but was effective short and long when given the chance. Meanwhile Testaverde wasn't even asked to throw long, he just dumped the ball off repeatedly until someone looked at the scoreboard and realized that we were still trailing an injury-depleted Arizona team with six minutes left to go in the game.

Now please, just shut up.

 

Technically they both put up 6 if you do not count field goals or extra points......

Vinny led the offense to 25 points while Carr only had 13. I give Vinnie some credit for DW's run because if he had sucked royally they would have been playing for the run and probably have stopped DW. It all works together. A decent passing threat makes it easier to run.

 

Key and Parcells both say "stick with Vinny"

bias?

 

Hurney was all up in Vinny's stuff on Panther Talk. Effusive praise of leadership, professionalism etc., I thought to the point where if Jake were here he'd be challenged.

 

Steve Mariucci's interview with Vinny - about 5 minutes long - from NFL Total Access:

http://www.nfl.com/videos?videoId=09000d5d80350049