Search results

Yeah we don't seem to get the "coverage sacks" the good defenses do. I feel ya on our pass rush problem, it will be our undoing if it's not corrected.

It means nobody was open.

I've never seen one here but feel free to start one.

Ladies, the intelligent part of the debate is fucking OVER! NO you do NOT replace Dak with Romo.

This is what it looks and feels like when a team has chemistry. Not playing at its best against a quality opponent but still executing. Please Jerry do NOT fuck up this chemistry by benching Dak for Romo.

When you eschew ALL purely emotional reasons for Romo to return especially the infantile "he deserves it" one, no reason remains to just replace Dak as the starter.

She did not agree, she is not capable of making such a agreement or giving any consent for it whatsoever. Chugging a beer isn't comparable. The child is a victim not a participant. What, you think if the perp grooms them properly it's all well and good and the vic is a accomplice when the vic...

Minors cannot legally give consent. Therefore there is no consent, it's just flat out rape. That's the law.

Then you better damn well not play him anymore. Because he's just gonna get busted up again, and trade value sinks more. "Deserves" what? The 100 million we're giving him. He doesn't "deserve" to just walk right back into the job any more than Dak "deserves" to be benched.

Except, Dak has the ability and knows when, to take off running.

No they did not. He began a sexual assault relationship with the minor. She has no ability to give consent.

Is it working out any better now?

Correct.

ORRRRR the 200 that was originally cackled about in this thread, which is what started the whole conversation about how strong GB's run defense really is.

I like our chances, even in Lambeau. But it's not homer, it's logic. And yeah the 90s Cowboys weren't afraid to win ugly. The good teams do that.

Wow it's surprising one game makes that much difference in the per-game averages. Of course the sample is small, only 5 games so that's why. Great job researching and calculating all of this, really cool and i really appreciate it.

Here's my logic:

There's no need for that, since the quoted portion of TE's post covers your theory: "FWIW, Football Outsiders has GB as the #2 run defense in the league, even adjusted for opponent."

When was this, ever?

That is not what you said. You said we would gain more than 200 yards rushing on them. I do have a PayPal but there is no bet and really no dispute. Of course we should do better than the 50 they allow. I'd bet that in a heartbeat. I've bolded the highly relevant part of your most intelligent...