Rush should have mentioned Urlacher - Fantasy Football Cafe 2014 Fantasy Football Cafe


Return to Football Talk

Rush should have mentioned Urlacher

Moderator: Football Moderators

Postby emaja » Sat Oct 04, 2003 8:44 am

Cambodian wrote:How can you say Urlacher is overrated? He had the most solo tackles in the league!


Don't get too wrapped up in Urlacher's stats. Those tackle stats are assigned by HIS OWN TEAM when watching game film. This Monday's game had him down for 4 tackles. When the coaches watched film, he miraculously got credit for something like 14.

I don't know what game they were watching, but I think that was a very generous number.

Urlacher is hyped because he is a Bear MLB, not because of his color.
emaja
Head Coach
Head Coach

User avatar

Posts: 1978
Joined: 28 Aug 2003
Home Cafe: Football
Location: Wearing the PB with pride looking for my Bears crack pipe...

Postby Guest » Sat Oct 04, 2003 4:14 pm

Using the fact that Urlacher's jersey was the number #1 seller to prove he's over-rated is crazy. What other jersey would a bears fan buy, Kordell's?..hahahhhhaa. He's not over-rated because he's white. He's overrated because the media hypes him up. They don't do it because he's white, they do it because he has charisma. The number one reason why superstars make the big money. Their talent helps, but they need charisma to get all those endorsements. A very good example is in MLB this year. Dontrelle Willis came in and did alright. But, because of his charisma, everyone instantly was drawn to him. I found myself even rooting for him, when I'm not even close to a Marlin's fan. He was over-rated, but it players like him that make sports worth watching.

The reason why McNabb gets alot of attention is because he has charisma, not because he is black. Is he over-rated?...ya, a little. Is every single superstar in all sports over-rated?...ya. Football is a sport that relies on almost the whole team. Not just one person is going to win it. There are only a few people I can think of that have lived up to their "superstar" status. In the NBA, (while I've been alive) Larry Bird and Michael Jordan have lived up to their hype. Not only do they have the rings to prove it, they have the stats to prove it. In football, I don't see anyone thats lived up to their hype, because it's a TEAM game. If a reciever gets 1500 yards in a season, it's because his team allowed him to get open. In baseball, only Barry Bonds has lived up to his hype. If you don't think he's one the best to EVER play, then you don't know baseball. And forget about hockey, I don't watch that shit.

P.S. I may of left a few names out of superstars that have lived up to their hype, but you get my point.
Guest


Home Cafe: Football
Friendliness: %

Postby Trainer of Dolphins » Sat Oct 04, 2003 4:23 pm

Barry Bonds is not the BEST to play ever. The Babe hit like a monster, AND he was a dominant pitcher. He affected the game in a way Bonds never will/could
Trainer of Dolphins
Defensive Assistant
Defensive Assistant

User avatar

Posts: 622
Joined: 11 Jul 2003
Home Cafe: Football
Location: Heaven, no it's IOWA

Postby guest » Sat Oct 04, 2003 5:40 pm

McNabb has Charisma?....
guest


Home Cafe: Football
Friendliness: %

Postby arrbez » Sat Oct 04, 2003 6:48 pm

Anonymous wrote:There are only a few people I can think of that have lived up to their "superstar" status. In the NBA, (while I've been alive) Larry Bird and Michael Jordan have lived up to their hype. Not only do they have the rings to prove it, they have the stats to prove it. In football, I don't see anyone thats lived up to their hype, because it's a TEAM game. If a reciever gets 1500 yards in a season, it's because his team allowed him to get open. In baseball, only Barry Bonds has lived up to his hype. If you don't think he's one the best to EVER play, then you don't know baseball. And forget about hockey, I don't watch that shit.

P.S. I may of left a few names out of superstars that have lived up to their hype, but you get my point.


Don't disclude hockey, being that it's 100x the team sport that baseball or basketball are.

moving on,

I don't think McNabb has much charisma at all. he's pretty boring in interviews. He gets great results when he's playing well, but none of his plays are the kind that kind atake your breath away. plays like urlacher filling some guy in, or randy moss jumping effortlessly over 3 defenders and keeping his feet in bounds for the TD
It doesn't need to be in good taste, so long as it tastes good
arrbez
Defensive Assistant
Defensive Assistant

User avatar

Posts: 493
Joined: 2 Sep 2003
Home Cafe: Football
Location: Toronto

Postby josebach » Sat Oct 04, 2003 7:07 pm

Trainer of Dolphins wrote:Barry Bonds is not the BEST to play ever. The Babe hit like a monster, AND he was a dominant pitcher. He affected the game in a way Bonds never will/could


Babe Ruth had a huge impact on the game of baseball. Some of his stats are even better than Barry Bonds. With that being said, there is no way Babe Ruth was a better hitter than Bonds.
All you have to do to prove this is look at the competition that Babe Ruth played against, compared to the competition that Barry Bonds currently plays against. Baseball has evolved so much in the last 60 years it's not even funny (coaching, training, conditioning, talent pool). There were 100 million fewer Americans to scout talent from when Babe Ruth played. Not to mention the fact that there were no hispanic or black players in the Majors when Babe Ruth played. How good could the competition have been? Of course there is no way to actually prove who is better, but if you used your brain, you should be able to figure it out for yourself.
josebach
General Manager
General Manager

User avatar
Cafe Ranker
Posts: 4611
Joined: 27 Aug 2003
Home Cafe: Football
Location: Tallahassee, FL

Postby Guest » Sat Oct 04, 2003 7:11 pm

Trainer of Dolphins wrote:Barry Bonds is not the BEST to play ever. The Babe hit like a monster, AND he was a dominant pitcher. He affected the game in a way Bonds never will/could


I said he's one of the best ever, not the best ever. Ruth, even though I'm a sox fan :(, is one of the best ever too. But, we can't really compare Bonds and Ruth. Different time, and really a different game. I was trying to prove a point that everyone says how dominating Bonds is, AND HE IS!! I am sure Ruth was as dominating at the plate. BUT, correct me if I'm wrong, but Ruth never had 30+ sb's in a year. Now, that doesn't mean that Bonds is better, it just means he can hurt you in more than one way, or used to be able too.

I think McNabb is exciting to watch. To me, he is just as exciting as Mike Vick (Ya, I said it!). I don't know why, but I can't stand watching a Peyton Manning or a Kurt Warner. It's not because of skin color either. It's because they don't have the "stuff." McNabb, Farve, Vick, Culpepper(kinda) and Kordell are just exciting to watch. Kordell is just incredible. He can drop back and throw the 50 yard interception. He can even run the ball 40 yards, before he fumbles it. People like him only come around once a decade.
Guest


Home Cafe: Football
Friendliness: %

Postby M_Zimm_ffc » Sat Oct 04, 2003 7:14 pm

Rush is right, but I don't think it has anything to do with being black, and Urlacher is very overrated.
M_Zimm_ffc
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

Cafe RankerGraphics ExpertMock(ing) DrafterEagle Eye
Posts: 5603
Joined: 20 Sep 2003
Home Cafe: Football

Postby Guest » Sat Oct 04, 2003 10:46 pm

I think one of the main reasons Mcnabb gets so much hype is that from the day he was the eagles first round pick the media has been all over him. At the very beginning it was negative press because everyone thought the eagles were crazy for taking him before getting a good running back and they were waiting for him to fall on his face so they could say I told you so. It then turned into hey this kid can play after all and he has been a media darling ever since.
As far as Rush's comments He was stating his opinon of the press more than he was critisizing Mcnabb. Although I dont agree with his comments on this subject He is entitled to his opinion
Guest


Home Cafe: Football
Friendliness: %

Postby bigfoot_ffc » Sun Oct 05, 2003 1:42 am

Anonymous wrote:
I said he's one of the best ever, not the best ever. Ruth, even though I'm a sox fan :(, is one of the best ever too. But, we can't really compare Bonds and Ruth. Different time, and really a different game. I was trying to prove a point that everyone says how dominating Bonds is, AND HE IS!! I am sure Ruth was as dominating at the plate. BUT, correct me if I'm wrong, but Ruth never had 30+ sb's in a year. Now, that doesn't mean that Bonds is better, it just means he can hurt you in more than one way, or used to be able too.


Yes, I agree that it is hard to compare players over different eras and I don't know who is better.

No, Ruth never did steal 20, but did Bonds ever win 20 games and have and ERA under 2.00? Don't say Ruth couldn't beat you in more ways than one.
bigfoot_ffc
Water Boy
Water Boy

User avatar

Posts: 62
Joined: 7 Sep 2003
Home Cafe: Football

Previous

Return to Football Talk

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests

cron
Forums Articles & Tips Start & Sit Sleepers Rankings Leagues


Get Ready...
The 2014 NFL season kicks off in 21:36 hours
(and 35 days)
2014 NFL Schedule


  • Fantasy Football
  • Article Submissions
  • Privacy Statement
  • Site Survey 
  • Contact