Starting line up on opening day

Just to lighten the mood, everybody loves fluffy kittens.

 

yeah, that's about ridiculous enough to fit. I guess I'm out of it since it's progressed far enough off topic that even the "you're a fucking idiot for disagreeing with me" points have fallen aside.

 

Wow. I love the banter. I have not gotten to read it all; however, I must say that in today's NFL you really do need 2 starting caliber RBS. That is particularly true with the Panthers since they rely so heavily on the run and have a featured back who is prone to injury.....and in seasons in which Foster has always shared the load. I think that sharing should continue.

To be honest I was wholly underwhelmed with the preseason performance of Shelton. I suspect the Panthers were also since they put him on IR when I do not think that was necessary. I think they wanted to keep Robertson. Put another way, I think the Panthers viewed Shelton as the fifth best back on the roster.

 

Comparing it across the league, we're okay. Our top 2 are not outstanding, but starting-caliber nonetheless. And I'd say that we rely on the pass much more than we did two years ago. Having another threat at wideout can only help, so whatever we have by September should do the trick.

 

Who do you consider our top 2........Foster and Goings or Foster and Shelton?

Suppose Foster gets injured as has been the case doing part-time duty in 3 of 4 years. Are you satisfied with Goings, Shelton, and Robertson? If we can not run effectively I think Jake will get killed.:banginghe

 

Except that you did ("We need 3, honestly 4 LBs, and we have 3 that could easily start and one that probably could), but it's cool that you now realize how full of shit you were.

Dude, I just quoted you. You can argue with me, but when you argue with yourself you just look like a jackass. You said, "Draft hasn't started at SLB in years. So? Starting at ILB in a 3-4 - same difference" That is saying that SLB and 3-4 ILB are equal.

You are such an ass when you outright lie. I never said that Draft is only a MLB, just that I prefer him there. I said he hasn't played SLB in ages, only played it sparingly even then, and thus is no guarantee to be any good at it. I'm fine with trying him there if we have a capable backup for Morgan and have another quality option at SLB if he can't handle it adequately. But again, thanks for lying about what I'm saying because you can't actually win this argument legitimately.

It is retarded to place a higher priority on a RB than on a LB. If Williams or White are there, we take them because they're perceived to be that much better than any LB (assuming Hawk is long gone), but LB is definitely more important than RB for us. Foster can probably give us have a season, Shelton looked great at Louisville, and Goings did about as well as Foster has done when he was the starter. Between those three, we're at least adequate at RB. I'd like someone long-term so we can jettison the Foster contractual mistake after the season, but it's certainly not a need for '06.

Meanwhile Morgan is as much or more of an injury risk than Foster, we don't know if Draft can still start, we don't know what TD will bring, and we have no experienced backups to provide any competition at any of the three positions, much less fill in for Morgan's inevitable injury and any potential missed time from the other two. Seward looked promising in very limited action, but having him as the only legitimate back-up and/or starter competition at all three positions is utterly moronic.

 

Nope. That, in no way or form says "we don't need a linebacker." In the freaking description you just posted I state that we have 3 that could start, not a defining four. I never stated I don't want a linebacker, and obviously do - I've been talking about getting one all offseason. I just don't feel like it's a greater need.
Just as I stated that SLB and 3-4 ILB were similar, not identical, and certainly more analogous than 4-3 WLB. But, if you need to twist my words to find a reason to get angry because I don't agree with you, I'm sure you will.

Awesome. Irrational anger wins again! My opinion is stupid because it disagrees with yours.

 

If you're going to lie about what you've said, try not doing it in the same thread as your initial comment. It makes this too easy.

You always hide behind this excuse when you've lost an argument with me, nevermind that I regularly disagree with people whose opinions aren't stupid. You always have been and always will be a coward like that.

 

yeah I lost and stuff
Your anger is hilarious :94poopban