Ray Rice played with the first team, McGahee got carries with the backups, and some dude named Parmele played with the scrubs. I still dont think McGahee is 100% from that knee surgery and imagine at this point he is #2 in Baltimore. McGahee had one nice run that really was all him, the rest of the time he got nothing. I imagine it will be a lot like last year where Rice, McGahee, and McClain share the ball a good bit (although McClain will have to play more FB this year)
Leon Washington was the most impressive back the entire time, both in carries and catches. That guy is just so quick and makes great cuts, very dangerous.
There was also a guy late in the game who fair caught a punt without a defender anywhere near him. I hope he was cut immediately.
Originally posted by forumcrew
Ray Rice played with the first team, McGahee got carries with the backups, and some dude named Parmele played with the scrubs.
If this is the same Parmele I'm thinking of, he played with the Dolphins years ago. Man, I wouldn't have bet anything he was still in the league. I could be wrong, though. It could be his cousin.
Originally posted by Lord Evolution
What game were you watching?
The one where he looked terrible? I guess you want to say he threw a TD! as atonement for the rest of the game. The fact is the TD came after several of the Ravens 1st team D had come out of the game and even with it the performance was bad.
Stat wise he sucked. 3/8 passing. He threw a pick 6 his 1st pass. He should have thrown a 2nd one on his next pass but Lewis dropped it. He had a couple delay of game penalties, and he had a fumble. Overall he just did not look comfortable at all out there, he looked like a very inexperienced kid against one of the best D's in the league.
He looked OK. He didn't look terrible and he certainly didn't look "very very bad". Yes I want to say that he threw a touchdown, you know, because it actually happened? And only two of the Ravens starters came out of the game, it makes them worse, but they are still very much good.
What I liked is how he rebounded from the bad start and finished with a good drive and capped it off with a great pass to Washington for the TD. Don't look at the fact that two Ravens starters were out of the game(which the idiot ESPN announcers mentioned several times, undoubtedly shaping YOUR opinion), but look at the fact that he faced pressure, got out of the pocket, squared up, set his feet and threw a perfect pass.
Speaking of USC QB's, Leinart looked great against the Packers. I'm still crossing my fingers on that Warner injury.
When looking at the fact that 3 USC QB's are starting for NFL teams, and one who SHOULD be starting for a NFL team, one has to wonder how Booty ever started a single game at SC. The bum. At least Pete isn't making that same mistake again. Barkley will be getting drafted in the top 10 in 3-4 years.
Originally posted by Lord Evolution
He looked OK. He didn't look terrible and he certainly didn't look "very very bad". Yes I want to say that he threw a touchdown, you know, because it actually happened? And only two of the Ravens starters came out of the game, it makes them worse, but they are still very much good.What I liked is how he rebounded from the bad start and finished with a good drive and capped it off with a great pass to Washington for the TD. Don't look at the fact that two Ravens starters were out of the game(which the idiot ESPN announcers mentioned several times, undoubtedly shaping YOUR opinion), but look at the fact that he faced pressure, got out of the pocket, squared up, set his feet and threw a perfect pass.
Speaking of USC QB's, Leinart looked great against the Packers. I'm still crossing my fingers on that Warner injury.
When looking at the fact that 3 USC QB's are starting for NFL teams, and one who SHOULD be starting for a NFL team, one has to wonder how Booty ever started a single game at SC. The bum. At least Pete isn't making that same mistake again. Barkley will be getting drafted in the top 10 in 3-4 years.
All you are proving once again is you cant read. ESPN announcers did not shape my opinion because I was AT THE GAME. Not watching on TV. Suggs did not even dress for the game so the Ravens started down one of their best, and then Ray Lewis and Ed Reed came out, and yes that makes a BIG difference.
In my opinion from being there watching him, he looked really bad. As I already stated he looked like a kid with little experience up against some of the best and did not look comfortable in that situation.
Calm down no one called him a bust so you can get off your USC high horse all that was said was (my own opinion) that he looked bad. I think most who watched would agree it was not pretty and not what you want to see from your starting QB.
Originally posted by Lord Evolution
He looked OK. He didn't look terrible and he certainly didn't look "very very bad". Yes I want to say that he threw a touchdown, you know, because it actually happened? And only two of the Ravens starters came out of the game, it makes them worse, but they are still very much good.What I liked is how he rebounded from the bad start and finished with a good drive and capped it off with a great pass to Washington for the TD. Don't look at the fact that two Ravens starters were out of the game(which the idiot ESPN announcers mentioned several times, undoubtedly shaping YOUR opinion), but look at the fact that he faced pressure, got out of the pocket, squared up, set his feet and threw a perfect pass.
Speaking of USC QB's, Leinart looked great against the Packers. I'm still crossing my fingers on that Warner injury.
When looking at the fact that 3 USC QB's are starting for NFL teams, and one who SHOULD be starting for a NFL team, one has to wonder how Booty ever started a single game at SC. The bum. At least Pete isn't making that same mistake again. Barkley will be getting drafted in the top 10 in 3-4 years.
You do know that Leinart was in danger of losing his backup role to the 3rd string this preseason, right? Not saying he'll lose it, but his backup role was indeed in danger. And Warner was in charge of probably the best passing attack in football.
Also, making assumptions rarely ends up working out. It also makes you look like a jerk when it is to insult someone else, then turns out to be false. If you'd like to be taken more seriously, you should try to start talking about people that you aren't a super-fan of. It establishes objectivity, and makes your opinion easier to swallow.
I only saw highlights, so I won't comment on this personally. I've learned to take everything in preseason wtih a grain of salt. And USC churns out enough QBs that eventually some of them will succeed (Carson Palmer comes to mind, a top 5 talent when healthy) but you aren't somehow entitled to greatness because you went to a particular college.
Originally posted by Digi
You do know that Leinart was in danger of losing his backup role to the 3rd string this preseason, right? Not saying he'll lose it, but his backup role was indeed in danger. And Warner was in charge of probably the best passing attack in football.Also, making assumptions rarely ends up working out. It also makes you look like a jerk when it is to insult someone else, then turns out to be false. If you'd like to be taken more seriously, you should try to start talking about people that you aren't a super-fan of. It establishes objectivity, and makes your opinion easier to swallow.
I only saw highlights, so I won't comment on this personally. I've learned to take everything in preseason wtih a grain of salt. And USC churns out enough QBs that eventually some of them will succeed (Carson Palmer comes to mind, a top 5 talent when healthy) but you aren't somehow entitled to greatness because you went to a particular college.
Leinart was in no danger of losing anything. I follow the Cards closely, that was a fake QB competition, and all Cards fans knew it. Just compare St. Pierre's play to Leinart's play(preseason, practice, last season, forever) and then look at Whisenhunt's comments about Leinart. Maybe it was to test Leinart, but there was no real competition in the first place. St. Pierre has played terrible against 3rd stringers, it's a wonder how he is even still in the league. With that being said, none of that changes the fact that I want Warner to either retire immediately or suffer a career ending injury for the sake of Leinart's career. They say he'll take over the reigns when Warner retires in 2 years, that is way too long for me.
I wonder where you heard about this QB competition. Perhaps from the same source that told Forumcrew that Sanchez had a "very very" bad game?
ESPN is clearly the devil.
Warner closely beat out Leinart last preseason, and then he continues to have an MVP type season. That's not to say that Leinart would have done the same, but it speaks volumes that it was even that close considering Warner is a first ballot Hall of Famer.
USC has one QB in the league who is on the fast track to faildom, and that is John David Booty. And no one thought he was going to be any good in the first place. Leinart, Palmer, Cassel and Sanchez all look good.
The Saints had the best passing attack bar none with over 5000 yards passing from Brees who nearly broke the all time record for yards in a season. Just a FYI.
Originally posted by Lord Evolution
I wonder where you heard about this QB competition. Perhaps from the same source that told Forumcrew that Sanchez had a "very very" bad game?ESPN is clearly the devil.
Do you really not know how to read? Just to keep explaining the obvious to you, I was at the Jets/Ravens game. Meaning in person, in the seats, watching with my eyes. It was my personal opinion that Sanchez looked like SHIT on the field that night. I did not have some secret source telling me what to think about the game I just watched. I did not know his stats exactly at the time I was simply watching him play and it did not look good to me.
I also had another opinion that game that Leon Washington looked very good, was extremely quick and explosive.
Originally posted by forumcrew
All you are proving once again is you cant read. ESPN announcers did not shape my opinion because I was AT THE GAME. Not watching on TV. Suggs did not even dress for the game so the Ravens started down one of their best, and then Ray Lewis and Ed Reed came out, and yes that makes a BIG difference.In my opinion from being there watching him, he looked really bad. As I already stated he looked like a kid with little experience up against some of the best and did not look comfortable in that situation.
Calm down no one called him a bust so you can get off your USC high horse all that was said was (my own opinion) that he looked bad. I think most who watched would agree it was not pretty and not what you want to see from your starting QB.
I get it. All the wrong Sanchez did counts x10, while the good things don't even count at all!
Please.
You need bigger glasses. The interception wasn't even that bad. The Ravens were able to get pressure on Sanchez the entire game. It was his first NFL start and it just happened to be against the best defense in the league. In no way shape or form was his performance bad. He had an interception on his first pass play and a touchdown on his last. Considering the amount of pressure he had on him(both from the Ravens and Jets), he fared pretty well.
The most important thing is that he bounced back after the rough start. But here you are leading people to believe that his finish somehow doesn't count, should be ignored, stricken from the records books or have an asterisk placed by it because two Ravens players weren't on the field? Are you kidding me?
Perhaps he should have walked over to the Ravens sideline and kindly asked Coach Harbaugh to put Reed and Lewis back in the game so his TD could really count.
I also had another opinion that game that Leon Washington looked very good, was extremely quick and explosive.
But were Lewis and Reed in the game? Lord knows he can't truly be considered quick and explosive without them two on the field.
Actually Leon did play while they were in the game and I dont even know what his stats were, which does not matter really because I was commenting on what he looked like on the field which I think is a concept far far above your head.
And again Suggs was also not in the game, so yes it counts less. What he does against the 1st team counts more than what he does against the 1st team minus its best 3 players. The kid completed THREE passes. The pick was that bad he put it right in the guys chest, and his next pass he put one right in Ray Lewis's chest, he just happened to drop it. And there were multiple delay of games (and yes this is on the QB) Yea it was the Ravens and they are hard not saying he should of killed them just saying overall he looked bad.
Yes he came back and got a touchdown. Regardless his entire performance did not look good. (not just some numbers but his play)
Subject over because unfortunately you are still a 12 year old homer with blinders on.
Originally posted by forumcrew
Actually Leon did play while they were in the game and I dont even know what his stats were, which does not matter really because I was commenting on what he looked like on the field which I think is a concept far far above your head.And again Suggs was also not in the game, so yes it counts less. What he does against the 1st team counts more than what he does against the 1st team minus its best 3 players. The kid completed THREE passes. The pick was that bad he put it right in the guys chest, and his next pass he put one right in Ray Lewis's chest, he just happened to drop it. And there were multiple delay of games (and yes this is on the QB) Yea it was the Ravens and they are hard not saying he should of killed them just saying overall he looked bad.
Yes he came back and got a touchdown. Regardless his entire performance did not look good. (not just some numbers but his play)
His play was OK. It didn't look good because instead of congratulating a young man on his first NFL Touchdown, the commentators felt they needed to stress multiple times that Lewis and Reed were pulled before that play. But when you look at it from a subjective point of view, he didn't play terrible, he didn't play great, he played OK. Especially when you consider the circumstances.
Subject over because unfortunately you are still a 12 year old homer with blinders on.
You mean how I pointed out how Sanchez was able to escape pressure, square up, set his feet and throw a touchdown pass?
To which you responded "Well uhhh, Lewis and Reed were not in the game, it doesn't count!"
Thanks for pointing out the obvious. You tend to do that a lot. "Lewis wasn't in the game" "Washington is quick and explosive".
Ahh I see..it counts lessss. Here I was thinking that Touchdown gave the Jets 6 points, as opposed to...6 points. What's the alternative here? I haven't played Madden in a while, are there now Touchdowns that are worth more than 6 points?
Yes he did complete 3 passes(why thank you for once again pointing out the obvious), but he only attempted 8. I had to laugh at how you came off there, as if it's pathetic that he only completed 3 of his 8 passes. WHAT ONLY 3!!!
His play was OK. It didn't look good because instead of congratulating a young man on his first NFL Touchdown, the commentators felt they needed to stress multiple times that Lewis and Reed were pulled before that play, or for the people who "actually attended the game", take points away because the level of difficulty went down when two players exited from the game. But when you look at it from a subjective point of view, he didn't play terrible, he didn't play great, he played OK. Especially when you consider the circumstances.