THEE NYG SWAG THREAD

[bigblue4417]

[DavenIII]

[quote user="MattMeyerBud"]So lets go through how that is FACTUALLY INACCURATE

2009 - The first real year Bradshaw had a role for our team. Awful year by BJ, but also the year he had the most carries in his career. So there was no "CUTTING" into BJs carries. He actually had more of a role and didn't do as well..[/quote]

There was "cutting" into BJ's carries in 2009 it was the first year it happened, Bradshaw went from 67 carries vs BJ's 219 carries in 2008 to 163 Carries for Bradshaw to 224 Carries for BJ

so no it's not factually inaccurate to say that BJ's woes first started in 2009 when Bradshaw WAS taking away carries from him, it doesn't matter that the overall amount of carries was higher for BJ...he took a lower percentage of the total carries.

2010 he had a sick year yes, but he was also the 2nd Back that year...Bradshaw was no longer "cutting into" his carries, he took his job already.

[Morehead State]

And it was going so well for you two!

[MattMeyerBud]

[quote user="Morehead State"]And it was going so well for you two![/quote]

it kicked in that hes gonna owe me 200 bucks so hes trying to moorehead me... i mean daven me..

I DONT KNOW WHAT TO CALL IT ANYMORE?!?!?!!?

[DavenIII]

[quote user="MattMeyerBud"][quote user="Morehead State"]And it was going so well for you two![/quote]

it kicked in that hes gonna owe me 200 bucks so hes trying to moorehead me... i mean daven me..

I DONT KNOW WHAT TO CALL IT ANYMORE?!?!?!!?
[/quote]

LOL...but yes..owing that 200$ sucks, the only upside is I'm still doing well in the other league im in with you.

[MattMeyerBud]

[quote user="DavenIII"][quote user="MattMeyerBud"]So lets go through how that is FACTUALLY INACCURATE

2009 - The first real year Bradshaw had a role for our team. Awful year by BJ, but also the year he had the most carries in his career. So there was no "CUTTING" into BJs carries. He actually had more of a role and didn't do as well..[/quote]

There was "cutting" into BJ's carries in 2009 it was the first year it happened, Bradshaw went from 67 carries vs BJ's 219 carries in 2008 to 163 Carries for Bradshaw to 224 Carries for BJ

so no it's not factually inaccurate to say that BJ's woes first started in 2009 when Bradshaw WAS taking away carries from him, it doesn't matter that the overall amount of carries was higher for BJ...he took a lower percentage of the total carries.

2010 he had a sick year yes, but he was also the 2nd Back that year...Bradshaw was no longer "cutting into" his carries, he took his job already.



[/quote]

2008: Carries: Jacobs - 219, Ward - 182, Bradshaw - 67
2009: carries: Jacobs - 224, Bradshaw - 163, every other back combined - 35

FACTUALLY untrue that BRadshaw cut into BJs carries. As Bradshaw got promoted to the RB2 spot, he got less carries than the previous years RB2 got in WArd

Not to mention JAcobs carries actually went up

[DavenIII]

[quote user="MattMeyerBud"]

2008: Carries: Jacobs - 219, Ward - 182, Bradshaw - 67
2009: carries: Jacobs - 224, Bradshaw - 163, every other back combined - 35

FACTUALLY untrue that BRadshaw cut into BJs carries. As Bradshaw got promoted to the RB2 spot, he got less carries than the previous years RB2 got in WArd

Not to mention JAcobs carries actually went up

[/quote]

FINE!

Still Jacobs had 2 years where he had 1000 Yards Carried the Load and average 5.0-YPC that's more then you can say for Bradshaw any year, he's never really averaged over 5.0 - YPC for a season (need at least 100 Carries imho)

[Morehead State]

[quote user="MattMeyerBud"][quote user="Morehead State"]And it was going so well for you two![/quote]

it kicked in that hes gonna owe me 200 bucks so hes trying to moorehead me... i mean daven me..

I DONT KNOW WHAT TO CALL IT ANYMORE?!?!?!!?
[/quote]</P>


But we all know what being "MMB'd" means. And when someone gets "Reverse MMB'd" its an especially beautiful thing.</P>


You did it twice.</P>

[bigblue4417]

[bigblue4417]

[quote user="Morehead State"][/quote]
<div class="report">


Willis McGahee was limited in Tuesday's practice.</p>
</div>
<div class="impact">
Reports from the media-access portion of practice
suggest McGahee was very limited. The Broncos have been unrealistically
optimistic on his status since the end of Sunday's game. At this point,
he's headed for the dreaded game-time decision.


I hope you have your waiver in for Mr. Ball sir []
</div>