Who would have thought, with the relative inexperience of the recievers, that McNabb's passer rating would be in the 100s through 6 weeks of the season? Presently, he leads the league with a 104.8 rating--now if he could only run when he gets in trouble, throw the ball away, or throw early when he has a reciever wide open (as Smith was on first drive on Sunday).
it would be even higher if the WR's would strop dropping the damn ball.
I would trade 20 QB rating points for a farging running game.
Quote from: MURP on October 18, 2006, 09:34:40 AM
it would be even higher if the WR's would strop dropping the damn ball.
Looks like we caught that dropped pass virus from Seattle.
Quote from: MURP on October 18, 2006, 09:34:40 AM
it would be even higher if the WR's would strop dropping the damn ball.
what he said.
Quote from: rjs246 on October 18, 2006, 09:37:55 AM
I would trade 20 QB rating points for a farging running game.
that too.
McNabb still falls into that mental trap in thinking that if he runs the ball people will say that he can't throw with accuracy and efficiency. He obviously proved that, and I think the onus on many is on the WR's, especially this season, for dropping the balls that hit them in the chest.
If McNabb just busts a decent run -- for 8-12 yards, the Defense has to play looser and respect his scrambling abilities. He did that earlier in the year, but now it seems like he went back into his shell that "if I scramble people will think I'm not a QB who can win a game with his arm" -- that's bunk. And I still think that's a mental obstacle he has to overcome -- even in the prime of his career.
I can remember a few times when he had the ability to run in the Saints game but decided to try and buy more time in the pocket. If he get's injured running -- fine. He probably has the same probability getting severely injured scrambling around in the backfield trying to buy time and getting blindsided by someone who missed a blocking assignment. At least when he's running in the open field has has the ability to slide. . .
McNabb breaking a run energizes everyone, builds momentum, and keeps the chains moving. It still doesn't make sense why he doesn't use that ability more often.
Quote from: Eaglez on October 18, 2006, 11:13:04 AM
McNabb still falls into that mental trap in thinking that if he runs the ball people will say that he can't throw with accuracy and efficiency. He obviously proved that, and I think the onus on many is on the WR's, especially this season, for dropping the balls that hit them in the chest.
If McNabb just busts a decent run -- for 8-12 yards, the Defense has to play looser and respect his scrambling abilities. He did that earlier in the year, but now it seems like he went back into his shell that "if I scramble people will think I'm not a QB who can win a game with his arm" -- that's bunk. And I still think that's a mental obstacle he has to overcome -- even in the prime of his career.
I can remember a few times when he had the ability to run in the Saints game but decided to try and buy more time in the pocket. If he get's injured running -- fine. He probably has the same probability getting severely injured scrambling around in the backfield trying to buy time and getting blindsided by someone who missed a blocking assignment. At least when he's running in the open field has has the ability to slide. . .
McNabb breaking a run energizes everyone, builds momentum, and keeps the chains moving. It still doesn't make sense why he doesn't use that ability more often.
I think what it comes down to (in his mind.....and no I'm not a mind reader, I'm just speculating) is that he wants to give the recievers every possible opportunity to get open and make plays. I think his scrambling is simply going to be limited to, for the most part, games where no one seems to be stepping up downfield. IE: Green Bay game.
The recievers weren't getting open and the running game was crap in the redzone. So McNabb decided to do all the work in the 2nd half and things finally opened up. And I think that's what we're going to see from McNabb from here on out.
let's not forget how mentally fragile he is.
And slow.
And fat. Don't forget fat.
But seriously, I still don't trust him to win a big game. Bash away, douches.
Quote from: rjs246 on October 18, 2006, 03:47:59 PM
And fat. Don't forget fat.
But seriously, I still don't trust him to win a big game. Bash away, douches.
Bashes. Asterik, asterik.
Quote from: MURP on October 18, 2006, 09:34:40 AM
it would be even higher if the WR's would strop dropping the damn ball.
I'm glad you said it.
Quote from: rjs246 on October 18, 2006, 03:47:59 PM
And fat. Don't forget fat.
But seriously, I still don't trust him to win a big game.
You'd better start, he could be the best chance you'll ever have in your lifetime.
Really though, can you take anything away from this man?? After TO and all the other puke and shtein??? Who made who better?? farg that punk bitch.
What other qb has gone through half what Dmac has and come back like he has so far?? He's the man, plain and simple. If nothing else, he should have the respect of every decent football fan out there.
Quote from: shorebird on October 18, 2006, 09:09:26 PM
Quote from: MURP on October 18, 2006, 09:34:40 AM
it would be even higher if the WR's would strop dropping the damn ball.
I'm glad you said it.
Quote from: rjs246 on October 18, 2006, 03:47:59 PM
And fat. Don't forget fat.
But seriously, I still don't trust him to win a big game.
You'd better start, he could be the best chance you'll ever have in your lifetime.
Really though, can you take anything away from this man?? After TO and all the other puke and shtein??? Who made who better?? farg that punk bitch.
What other qb has gone through half what Dmac has and come back like he has so far?? He's the man, plain and simple. If nothing else, he should have the respect of every decent football fan out there.
^^^^^^^
Listen to this man.
You are completely missing the point. Every big game opportunity that he has been in has resulted in failure. Have they all ben his fault? No. Has he elevated himself above the other mitigating circumstances? No.
I'm not attacking him. Or saying that he hasn't overcome a lot. Arguing that would be idiotic. McNabb and Westbrook are two of my favorite players and they certainly have my respect (assuming otherwise is assinine). But they are flawed and everyone with a brain can see it.
I'm simply saying that until he wins on the biggest level I will not trust him to put this team on his back, against good competition, on the biggest stage and carry this team to a championship. I will always have doubts.
But seriously. He's fat. And this team needs to learn to run the ball rather than just put every farging game on the shoulders of one player.
Quote from: rjs246 on October 18, 2006, 10:06:51 PM
You are completely missing the point. Every big game opportunity that he has been in has resulted in failure.
If that were true they wouldnt have ever gotten to the NFC Championship game multiple times, nor the superbowl.
Playing for a team that had home field advantage three years in a row AND made four straight NFCCGs you just can't make that argument. Those teams were good enough to go to, and win, at least one superbowl. But they didn't so you are going to try to argue that Wildcard and Divisional round games are 'big games'? Please. You're embarrassing yourself.
McNabb roolz.
Quote from: rjs246 on October 18, 2006, 10:31:28 PM
Playing for a team that had home field advantage three years in a row AND made four straight NFCCGs you just can't make that argument. Those teams were good enough to go to, and win, at least one superbowl. But they didn't so you are going to try to argue that Wildcard and Divisional round games are 'big games'? Please. You're embarrassing yourself.
So wildcard and divisional games are nothing? They are the playoffs! That is a big game. I don't care if it is at home, in his goddamn front yard or whatever. It's a big game because it's lose and go home. And to try to pawn off the wins as the other 52 guys and/or because they got there so much they were just bound to win once is bullshtein.
Basically you say that because they never won a SB its McNabb's fault and not the fault of the entire team/staff. But then when it comes to getting there its not McNabb who gets credit, its the team or circumstances. Please. You're embarassing yourself by saying that any playoff game is not a big game.
I guess in your mind no game is a big game unless its a CCG or SB. In that case there are a lot of QBs in the NFL who suck.
Quote from: rjs246 on October 18, 2006, 10:06:51 PM
You are completely missing the point. Every big game opportunity that he has been in has resulted in failure. Have they all ben his fault? No. Has he elevated himself above the other mitigating circumstances? No.
I'm not attacking him. Or saying that he hasn't overcome a lot. Arguing that would be idiotic. McNabb and Westbrook are two of my favorite players and they certainly have my respect (assuming otherwise is assinine). But they are flawed and everyone with a brain can see it.
I'm simply saying that until he wins on the biggest level I will not trust him to put this team on his back, against good competition, on the biggest stage and carry this team to a championship. I will always have doubts.
But seriously. He's fat. And this team needs to learn to run the ball rather than just put every farging game on the shoulders of one player.
McNabb already put this team on his back--when he had Darnell Autry, Amp Lee, and god knows who else for RBs and Charles Johnson and Torrance Small for WRs.
Quote from: PhillyPhreak54 on October 19, 2006, 03:21:05 AM
Quote from: rjs246 on October 18, 2006, 10:31:28 PM
Playing for a team that had home field advantage three years in a row AND made four straight NFCCGs you just can't make that argument. Those teams were good enough to go to, and win, at least one superbowl. But they didn't so you are going to try to argue that Wildcard and Divisional round games are 'big games'? Please. You're embarrassing yourself.
So wildcard and divisional games are nothing? They are the playoffs! That is a big game. I don't care if it is at home, in his goddamn front yard or whatever. It's a big game because it's lose and go home. And to try to pawn off the wins as the other 52 guys and/or because they got there so much they were just bound to win once is bullshtein.
Basically you say that because they never won a SB its McNabb's fault and not the fault of the entire team/staff. But then when it comes to getting there its not McNabb who gets credit, its the team or circumstances. Please. You're embarassing yourself by saying that any playoff game is not a big game.
I guess in your mind no game is a big game unless its a CCG or SB. In that case there are a lot of QBs in the NFL who suck.
To say McNabb has never won a big game is nuts. Every playoff game, the day before it's played, is the biggest game of every player on that teams career.
Quote from: PhillyPhreak54 on October 19, 2006, 03:21:05 AM
I guess in your mind no game is a big game unless its a CCG or SB. In that case there are a lot of QBs in the NFL who suck.
You're absolutely right. In my mind there are a lot of QBs who suck. Among the few top tiered QBs there are two that have constantly been surrounded by quality teams and haven't been able to get over the hump. One is Peyton Manning. And what is everyone's favorite adjective for him? The other is Donovan McNabb, but none of you will use that same adjective for DMac. Why? Oh right, because you're homers who will defend all things Eagles tooth and nail.
Quote from: rjs246 on October 19, 2006, 07:21:44 AM
Quote from: PhillyPhreak54 on October 19, 2006, 03:21:05 AM
I guess in your mind no game is a big game unless its a CCG or SB. In that case there are a lot of QBs in the NFL who suck.
You're absolutely right. In my mind there are a lot of QBs who suck. Among the few top tiered QBs there are two that have constantly been surrounded by quality teams and haven't been able to get over the hump. One is Peyton Manning. And what is everyone's favorite adjective for him? The other is Donovan McNabb, but none of you will use that same adjective for DMac. Why? Oh right, because you're homers who will defend all things Eagles tooth and nail.
I think if you look at Manning and why everyone considers him a prime choker in the playoffs, and maybe not McNabb, it's because of his supporting cast--it's been far superior than ANYTHING the Eagles have put up--with the exception of when Owens was one fo the wideouts. To me, a QB with the talents of Edgerrin James, Marvin Harrison, Reggie Wayne, Brandon Stokely, Dallas Clark, plus their offensive line, that puts up huge numbers in the regular season but can't do it in the playoffs definitely deserves that label. I mean, one year they got shut out by the Jets in the WC game. Not to mention HFA in at least their first round games.
A fine point, but the Eagles' defense has always been superior to the Colts' (in the years in question anyway) and the Eagles dominated their conference in a way that the Colts never really did. The Eagles were talented enough to make and win the big game. You can blame the receivers or Andy Reid (and rightfully) but McNabb seemed to do just fine with Reid and those receivers every year until he got to the biggest stage and then he just fell apart. Look at his stats in NFCCGs and the Superbowl. They look NOTHING like his stats in other games. This is a dude who never turns the ball over and he's turned it over constantly in those games. That is the definition of choking.
I'm leaning more towards bobby but rjs makes a pretty stong argument. I don't think there's any denying that McNabb has performed at a level beneath his norm in most of the big games he's played in. But I also don't think there's any doubt that he is definately a better "big game QB" than Golden Boy, Peyton Manning.
This discussion isn't about whether McNabb's any good or not. We all know he is. It's about whether or not he plays at the same level during the post season as he does during the regular. And while he's had some pretty good games in the playoffs, he's also had more than his fair share of bombs as well.
Don't forget to give Mr.Gameplan and Adjustments his share of the losses.(big game) We were easily outcoached in "most" of those big games. By "most" I mean all.
Quote from: rjs246 on October 19, 2006, 08:15:10 AM
A fine point, but the Eagles' defense has always been superior to the Colts' (in the years in question anyway) and the Eagles dominated their conference in a way that the Colts never really did. The Eagles were talented enough to make and win the big game. You can blame the receivers or Andy Reid (and rightfully) but McNabb seemed to do just fine with Reid and those receivers every year until he got to the biggest stage and then he just fell apart. Look at his stats in NFCCGs and the Superbowl. They look NOTHING like his stats in other games. This is a dude who never turns the ball over and he's turned it over constantly in those games. That is the definition of choking.
You do have a point--where he is better than 2:1 in the regular season TDs/INTs (147/68 including this year thus far--about 21/9 per regular season) he's only a little better than even (18-12) in the playoffs.
I think all of those big games, super bowl included the offense put up descent enough numbers. It is still a team loss. Clock management accounts for a good portion of late game losses with this team anymore. If we are saying that winning the SB is the only thing to rate a QB by then Brad Johnson is better then McNabb..
I would like to follow this up by saying that the coaching staff has choked in big games. Not one specific player.
4 NFCCGs and 1 Superbowl: (I'll include the one big game that he won.)
101/177, 1051 yds, 6 TDs, 8 Ints
Take out the win:
84/151, 871 yds, 4 TDs, 8 Ints
G.R.O.S.S.
dont forget the stellar competition mcnabb was rushing thru in his playoff career
jim miller
michael vick
shaun king
duante culpepper
jake delhomme
ect....
kurt warner and tom brady were the only great qb's he faced and he lost to both
McNabb didn't play against any of those QBs.
Quote from: rjs246 on October 18, 2006, 10:31:28 PM
Playing for a team that had home field advantage three years in a row AND made four straight NFCCGs you just can't make that argument. Those teams were good enough to go to, and win, at least one superbowl. But they didn't so you are going to try to argue that Wildcard and Divisional round games are 'big games'? Please. You're embarrassing yourself.
your right, the only big games McNabb has been in are the 3 NFC championships the eagles lost and the superbowl they lost. None of the games the Eagles won to get into the playoffs nor any playoff games they won were big, even the NFC Championship they won. Makes total sense.
McNabb is a great QB, and he gives the Eagles the best chance they've had in what, 40 years, of winning a championship. But the numbers don't lie. He comes up small in the final game of the season. No doubt Reid and Johnson, his wideouts, defense, etc contributed to those losses. But McNabb has his part too. I agree with RJS in that you guys (and me) ridicule Manning for being a choker, and he is. It also helps that he's a detestable human being, unlike McNabb. But until McNabb wins a championship, he's going to be labeled the same as Manning - a choker.
Elway was a choker for like 12 years. Hopefully we don't have to wait 4 more years for McNabb to lose that label.
Of course, if/when he does win it all, it'll probably be with another team. We're lucky like that.
Quote from: Sgt PSN on October 19, 2006, 09:58:31 PM
Of course, if/when he does win it all, it'll probably be with another team. We're lucky like that.
:-D :-D :-D
It's true. :'(
Just to throw in somethnig...couldnt' the increase in INT's be, in part, because McNabb decides to take more risks/shots during the "big" games? I'm not saying that's definate, but I mean you would think he would be trying "extra hard" to make the big throw, and throw it into coverage he wouldn't normally throw it into.
Not to mention at least ONE of his INT's is a direct result of the ball boucning off one of his WR's hands/chest/whatever you will.
I think the one "big game" McNabb defiantely choked in was the NFCCG against the Bucs. That last INT was a big choke job.
However, to say that the CC and the SB are the only big games, that's foolish.
Quote from: rjs246 on October 19, 2006, 07:21:44 AM
Quote from: PhillyPhreak54 on October 19, 2006, 03:21:05 AM
I guess in your mind no game is a big game unless its a CCG or SB. In that case there are a lot of QBs in the NFL who suck.
You're absolutely right. In my mind there are a lot of QBs who suck. Among the few top tiered QBs there are two that have constantly been surrounded by quality teams and haven't been able to get over the hump. One is Peyton Manning. And what is everyone's favorite adjective for him? The other is Donovan McNabb, but none of you will use that same adjective for DMac. Why? Oh right, because you're homers who will defend all things Eagles tooth and nail.
Homer? Yeah to an extent. But I will not defend everything about this team. They have flaws and i certainly point them out.
I can't see how you can say that the wild card and divisional games aren't big games. If he doesn't win those he can't make it to the NFCCG or SB. So would you rather he lose those games? Obviously not. But come on here.
The Carolina NFCCG was not on him. Not to mention he was hurt, but those WRs were not helping. Nor was Andy's playcalling that night. But no one wants to look at it like that. He's automatically blamed and when I (or anyone else) points this stuff out here comes the homer talk....
And the Tampa game was lost when Bobby Taylot INT'd the ball and they went three and out. Reid got conservative and blew it. He punts (it was a great punt by Lee Johnson) and then we all know what happened next- JJ takes off down the sideline. Obviously McNabb's INT was a killer, killer pick. Horrible. That was a collective effort. Reid stunk, McNabb stunk, defense stunk and Tra Thomas had his doors blown off by Rice.
I don't think Mcnabb choked against the Rams. The Eagles were on the road against a team that was quite dominant at the time. Sure we didn't win... but we weren't supposed to.
Also, I think those interception stats are a little inflated... In the Carolina game along, Ricky Manning Jr. got like 3 interceptions from the balls bouncing off the wide receivers hands.. or the wide receivers not coming back to the ball or making a play for it.
Not to mention, your numbers should drop off in the a championship game or superbowl... As you progress through the season and in the playoffs, you'll be facing better defenses along the line... Tampa Bay, Carolina, and New England all had great defenses.
--- End of drunken post
i love people picking apart every playoff game mcnabb ever lost to find anything to support it not being his fault...its pretty amazing...blame whoever you want the fact of the matter is the guy has never won THE big game in a career that has had more chances to do so than those most qb's that have ever played have had
ill even concede mcnabb has actually NEVER choked in a playoff game....but what he has never done is to step up and actually win one...especially the bigger games...
only ONCE in his postseason life has he thrown for more than 300 yards or two td's...and that was the superbowl in which he threw the game away with three ints and had 51 attempts...
Quote from: rjs246 on October 19, 2006, 12:57:15 PM
4 NFCCGs and 1 Superbowl: (I'll include the one big game that he won.)
101/177, 1051 yds, 6 TDs, 8 Ints
Take out the win:
84/151, 871 yds, 4 TDs, 8 Ints
These numbers deserve to be reposted. They don't lie. Andy Reid conservative play calling didn't throw twice as many interceptions as touchdowns in those playoff losses.
yeah but four of those ints were off wr hands or in general were tipped
one time mcnabb was under pressure
pinky ran the wrong route on another
and on the last two the wind was blowing pretty hard
The dead duck to Tedy Bruschi was my favorite.
worst play in eagles history
Quote from: rjs246 on October 18, 2006, 09:37:55 AM
I would trade 20 QB rating points for a farging running game.
Eagles have a running game Reid just doesn't use it. It's been this way since Reid has taken over the head coaching job. Fans never seem to get use to it. When we win with his game there are no complaints but when they lose everyone says we need a running game.
When we win with his game there are no complaints but when they lose everyone says we need a running game.
when they win what?
Haven't the Eagles won at least a game this year?
so your argument is that its possible to win a game by passing it 65% of the time?
Quote from: ice grillin you on October 20, 2006, 06:35:12 AM
i love people picking apart every playoff game mcnabb ever lost to find anything to support it not being his fault
why shouldn't the play of the team around him figure into how the game was won or lost?
the receivers were awful against Carolina, and then he got hurt. how can you even begin to blame him for that loss?
but he never gets credit for being the only thing on offense against the Packers the week before, when the Packers were probably the better team.
he hasn't played great in any of those games, he played well against Atlanta and threw the game away in the Super Bowl. but to act like he hasn't won any big games is silly. playoff games are big, games to win divisions are big. this year's Dallas game was big.
Eagles definitely need to run the ball more than 19 times a game. I'm not saying they don't need to run more. I'm saying that we all should be use to it by now that Reid has done this since he took over.
I'm saying that when the Eagles win by the pass you see no complaints but when they lose by the pass everyone gets on the bandwagon that we need to run the ball more. Eagles ran 18 times against San Fran but they won the game 38-24, they ran the ball 22 times by design against Green Bay and won 31-9 again no complaining about the lack of a running game, Eagles ran 18 times against Dallas in a game they won 38-24 and once again no complaints about the lack of a running game.
Reid got the Eagles to a Super Bowl with playing this type of football. I didn't hear anyone complaining when they made it to the Super Bowl not running the ball. Only time you heard about the lack of the running game then was when they lost it.
We should be complaining about the run after every game not just the ones they lose. The lack of the running game didn't have anything to do with the two losses that we had. Most have said it was the DB's that lost the games for the Eagles.
The Eagles need to control the ball more and the way to do that is through a runnning game. The offense has to help the defense out by staying on the field longer so the defense gets a chance to breathe before having to go back in.
why shouldn't the play of the team around him figure into how the game was won or lost?
if it were one season or maybe even two then you might be able to pick apart single plays in each game hes lost...maybe...
but over his era the offensive line has changed....the wr's have changed....the rb's have changed...the offensive coordinators have changed...the qb coachs have changed...for god sakes the stadium has changed...the only thing that hasnt changed is the qb (and the coach but thats another thread)
hes won some playoff games because of a good defense but mostly because of hideous competition...im supposed to credit him for beating jim miller and shane matthews or michael vick or shaun king...duante culpepper?...youre supposed to beat them...beat tom brady or hell even brad johnson and then talk
its sickening how many chances hes had to step up and win a superbowl yet hes only even taken his team to one...aka the same amount as jake delhomme and matt hasslebeck...the amazing thing to me is that hes had home field thruout three times...not in the playoffs three times or won the divison three times but home farging field three times...you had to win two measly games at home against a pathetic conference and you cant even do that
hes not a good playoff performer.....period....i dont know how anyone could say otherwise
Quote from: ice grillin you on October 20, 2006, 06:35:12 AM
i love people picking apart every playoff game mcnabb ever lost to find anything to support it not being his fault...its pretty amazing...blame whoever you want the fact of the matter is the guy has never won THE big game in a career that has had more chances to do so than those most qb's that have ever played have had
ill even concede mcnabb has actually NEVER choked in a playoff game....but what he has never done is to step up and actually win one...especially the bigger games...
only ONCE in his postseason life has he thrown for more than 300 yards or two td's...and that was the superbowl in which he threw the game away with three ints and had 51 attempts...
Well, we pick every game apart. If he's putting the ball on target and its not being caught what can he do? What can he do if the coach has him dropping back 60 times despite the run game working? What can he do if he has no time to set up shop in the pocket? It's a collaborative effort. True players can take games over - and McNabb has done this but he has to have someone making the catches for him.
That Carolina game still irks the piss out of me because Reid ran them all the way down to the 18 and they he goes pas and its INT'd.
And he was brutal in that SB. The defense shared in the blame but those INTs (the last one didn't matter) were ridiculous. Especially after he gets a reprieve on that one due to the penalty and promptly throws another one.
You left out homer. Anyone who disagrees that McNabb isn't a big game performer is a homer.... meh
not a homer just wrong
the main difference in the two camps here is that his supporters get into specific games and series to defend him which you can only do for so long before you have to say the guy has had more chances than anyone deserves or gets in a whole career and hes come up short to the point that talking about a wr that dropped a pass five years ago in the carolina game doesnt fly anymore
Here are the numbers:
7 years in the league
5 years making the playoffs
4 NFC Championship games
1 Super Bowl
There aren't too many QB's who can claim stats like that and of the ones who can, they had better receivers than Thrash and Pinkston to throw to.
If there aren't any big game recievers on the team then there's only so much a QB can do. Even the year we had Punk Bitch he was hurt for the playoffs and probably not 100% in the SB game. How many times can you run screens and dump it off to Westbrook with no running game and recievers who drop or get scared off the ball.
Just to be absolute about it I'll say something about how could you see it any other way...
He seems to be able to do it just fine until he gets to the NFCCG or Superbowl.
actually he doesnt even do espcially well up to that point...and even if you think he does its only taking him one game to get to the nfcc...
mcnabb can be easily summed up as this: hes a good qb who sometimes plays great when its not the post season
Yeh and if we had Favre we would have beaten Denver last year.... :sly
Quote from: ice grillin you on October 20, 2006, 01:45:47 PM
actually he doesnt even do espcially well up to that point...and even if you think he does its only taking him one game to get to the nfcc...
mcnabb can be easily summed up as this: hes a good qb who sometimes plays great when its not the post season
My drunkin argument to this point is that that #5 has never had the weapons. He puts the passes where they need to be and the guys that need to make plays on the other end were never good enough IN BIG GAMES because this front office has no skillz or is to busy lapping the salarary cap knob. Not saying #5 isn't infalable. Just saying that if he had better play makers this argument would be a as it should be. Whale shtein at the bottom of the Ocean.