SNF 10/25/2020 Seattle Seahawks @ Arizona Cardinals

[Benjamin1984 563]

Just now, Chippa said:

That offense in Arizona is way more advanced than that tight end heavy 6 yard pass offense they run in Baltimore to hide lamar’s arm deficiencies.

murray can hit all the passes. I have yet to see Lamar hit the deep passes as well as Murray. Kid’s a boss

For sure. He's just getting better and better. He has a chance to be great. I think a lot of people don't like it because they kind of can't quantify it. He's short and sometimes it looks kind of funny and the whole thing looks kinda unconventional. He crushes though. Remember this team was a **** show when he got drafted. A straight up circus. 

 

[vercrazy 964]

1 minute ago, Boogerloo said:

Dumbass ignored his best WR all game, finally threw to him and Metcalf broke one to the house, only to be called back. That's what happens when you get to cute instead of feeding the beast.

 

Yeah because the Seahawks clearly lost because of Lockett's 15/200/3...

[pdog109 4,677]

Can't drop Kirk now, but can't start him either lol

[JDE 293]

2 minutes ago, Boogerloo said:

Dumbass ignored his best WR all game, finally threw to him and Metcalf broke one to the house, only to be called back. That's what happens when you get to cute instead of feeding the beast.

Oh he fed the beast alright...

300 yards receiving and 3 TDs, I’ll take that to the bank

[Benjamin1984 563]

1 minute ago, SadFaceHappy said:

 

Murray has potential, but he's just playing backyard ball under KK.

This is exactly what I mean. People can't quantify it to themselves.

[SadFaceHappy 2,005]

2 minutes ago, phegotgame14 said:

LOL just stop already....you are making yourself more a fool the more you respond. Kyler can't win a game in real life hes only a fantasy guy....lol ok guy. 

That's not what was said.  I said "putting the game in Murray's hands is a mistake."

And look at overtime.  They put it on Edmonds to help.  They didn't make Murray do everything himself. 

You need to add reading comprehension to your list of things to learn.

[Chippa 1,086]

Just now, pdog109 said:

Can't drop Kirk now, but can't start him either lol

I’ve started him 2 weeks now. Last week over dj moore, and this week over arob.

I prob won’t start him again until their byes or I feel the match up is too good for Kirk and too awful for either arob or moore. 
 

that’s the reason I started kirk tn. Do not trust Robinson against LA and ramsey 

[pdog109 4,677]

1 minute ago, Chippa said:

I’ve started him 2 weeks now. Last week over dj moore, and this week over arob.

I prob won’t start him again until their byes or I feel the match up is too good for Kirk and too awful for either arob or moore. 
 

that’s the reason I started kirk tn. Do not trust Robinson against LA and ramsey 

 

Same here, dude bailed me out twice in a row now but without these TDs but Kirk is a TD MACHHHHHINE LOL.

 

[SadFaceHappy 2,005]

2 minutes ago, Benjamin1984 said:

This is exactly what I mean. People can't quantify it to themselves.

Quantify means to put numbers to it.  Plenty of those in football.

Qualify is the word you're looking for, which is what some of us are discussing. 

[Boogerloo 138]

4 minutes ago, vercrazy said:

 

Yeah because the Seahawks clearly lost because of Lockett's 15/200/3...

They STILL LOST. 

[Boogerloo 138]

5 minutes ago, JDE said:

Oh he fed the beast alright...

300 yards receiving and 3 TDs, I’ll take that to the bank

If they fed the real beast they would have won the game. Instead Russel threw a game losing INT.

[Redphan 89]

6 minutes ago, Zekepeak86 said:

No I just wanted you to know, nobody truly cares.

You obviously care, so that makes me and you 

Tyler Lockett 50 points!

[JoeJoe88 1,060]

Just now, Boogerloo said:

If they fed the real beast they would have won the game. Instead Russel threw a game losing INT.

We get it bro, you have DK and lost this week.  

[Chippa 1,086]

2 minutes ago, pdog109 said:

 

Same here, dude bailed me out twice in a row now but without these TDs but Kirk is a TD MACHHHHHINE LOL.

 

Yea Kirk is like the high volume runningback that doesn’t catch passes, and doesn’t have a high ypc, but uk he has the high touchdown upside.

So things can go either great or bad

but mainly great

[yossarian 3,244]

2 minutes ago, Boogerloo said:

If they fed the real beast they would have won the game. Instead Russel threw a game losing INT.

you seem very much like a rational and level-headed individual.

[Boogerloo 138]

1 minute ago, yossarian said:

you seem very much like a rational and level-headed individual.

Its fantasy football. I dont have to be.

[FalconIllusion 10]

36 minutes ago, SadFaceHappy said:

Do we know that?  Isn't KK's system basically designed for Murray?

I think you are right here, to some extent. It is a system built for Murray, and around his skills. Do I think it’s a system built for Murray to the extent that Baltimore set up for Lamar? No, it’s not close to that type of system. What we saw tonight is the ideal personal group for the Cards. Edmonds’ game is suited to be the workhorse back in this system. He is far superior in the pass game, in the option, and the speed of play that Zona likes to run. You don’t need a TE with this personal group. You have Kirk and Hop, who have to be respected, and even doubled, on the outside. You have Fitz and Isabella in the middle of the field, and lastly, you do have Arnold, who gets no defensive attention, and can get you a few surprise first downs or chunk plays. When you see them line up in 4 WR sets, with Arnold and Edmonds out there, it makes it all but impossible on the defense. You have to respect all of those weapons while trying to respect Murray’s ability to run. It’s a system that could work without Murray, but not as well as it does with him. I really do hope Edmonds gets a chance to be the workhorse from here out, as he has done nothing but prove that he fits this duel to a T. 

Edited October 26 by FalconIllusion

[SadFaceHappy 2,005]

1 minute ago, FalconIllusion said:

I think you are right here to some extent it is a system built for Murray, and around his skills. Do I think it’s a system built for Murray to the extent that Baltimore set a system up for Lamar? No, it’s not close to that type of system. What we saw tonight is the ideal personal group for the Cards. Edmonds’ game is suited to be the workhorse back in this system. He is far superior in the pass game, in the option, and the speed of play that Zona likes to run. You don’t need a TE with this personal group. You have Kirk and Hop, who have to be respect, and even doubled, on the outside. You have Fitz and Isabella in the middle of the field, and lastly, you do have Arnold, who gets no defensive attention, and can get you a few surprise first downs or chunk plays. When you see them line up in 4 WR sets, with Arnold and Edmonds out there, it makes it all but impossible on the defense. You have to respect all of those weapons while trying to respect Murray’s ability to run. It’s a system that could work without Murray, but not as well as it does with him. I really do hope Edmonds gets a chance to be the workhorse from here out, as he has done no thing but prove that he fits this duel to a T. 

^this is a good post

[Benjamin1984 563]

12 minutes ago, SadFaceHappy said:

Quantify means to put numbers to it.  Plenty of those in football.

Qualify is the word you're looking for, which is what some of us are discussing. 

Measure is another word for quantify. As in you're having trouble measuring (quantifying) the value of Kyler Murray to you're own standards. It works. Just say you'd prefer if he didn't succeed because you don't like the way he plays. 

Edited October 26 by Benjamin1984

[FalconIllusion 10]

3 minutes ago, SadFaceHappy said:

^this is a good post

Thanks man! Just wish I had done a better job proofreading before I hit submit. Haha.

[SadFaceHappy 2,005]

Just now, Benjamin1984 said:

Measure is another word for quantify. As in you're having trouble measuring (quantifying) the value of Kyler Murray to you're own standards. It works. Just say you'd prefer if he didn't succeed already because you don't like the way he plays. 

Yes, and measurements are numbers.  They're quantified in things like statistics and records.

You're still talking about qualifying his play, which is judging it by factors and analysis that doesn't isn't simply reciting the numbers.

Look at the post above by @FalconIllusion

It's a good post.  It talks about the qualities of Murray, his team, and the offense.  It makes good points.  It's interesting. 

What's not interesting are emotional outbursts that simply assert like/dislike based on feelz.

[Zekepeak86 1,582]

17 minutes ago, Redphan said:

You obviously care, so that makes me and you 

Tyler Lockett 50 points!

No, I really don’t. It’s fantasy. Lmao

[Benjamin1984 563]

1 minute ago, SadFaceHappy said:

Yes, and measurements are numbers.  They're quantified in things like statistics and records.

You're still talking about qualifying his play, which is judging it by factors and analysis that doesn't isn't simply reciting the numbers.

Look at the post above by @FalconIllusion

It's a good post.  It talks about the qualities of Murray, his team, and the offense.  It makes good points.  It's interesting. 

What's not interesting are emotional outbursts that simply assert like/dislike based on feelz.

Evaluate is another word for quantify. You're having trouble evaluating the value of Kyler Murray. You don't really seem to care for the style of player or the system. That's why I used that word. The backyard comment made that obvious. It isn't an emotional outburst. The kid is doing it. He did it in college and he's doing it now. Look, I didn't like Derrick Henry. Didn't care for that style of player. I like a different kind of running back. I was wrong. Sometimes you have to open yourself up to the possibility that what you thought isn't quite what is happening.

 

[SadFaceHappy 2,005]

2 minutes ago, Benjamin1984 said:

Evaluate is another word for quantify. You're having trouble evaluating the value of Kyler Murray. You don't really seem to care for the style of player or the system. That's why I used that word. The backyard comment made that obvious. It isn't an emotional outburst. The kid is doing it. He did it in college and he's doing it now. Look, I didn't like Derrick Henry. Didn't care for that style of player. I like a different kind of running back. I was wrong. Sometimes you have to open yourself up to the possibility that what you thought isn't quite what is happening.

 

Words have meanings.  I let you do your own research on that.

I like the type of player Murray is just fine.  I don't love the offense they run, because it's not very good.  But there are a lot of offenses in the NFL that aren't very good.  I use the term backyard because that's what it is - send a bunch of receivers out and have Kyle run around and make plays.  When it works, great.  But when you can't convert inside the ten, and turn the ball over, you get games like their losses to the Lions and Panthers.

You like Murray.  Cool.  But you're not really contributing to a conversation if you just try to tell other people how they feel.

You don't think it's a backyard offense, and/or Kyle is elite?  Great: tell us why.  Make an argument.  Point out what I'm missing, why I'm wrong to characterize it that way.

But if you're telling me or anyone else how they feel, all you're really doing is emoting yourself.  And that's boring, and meaningless.

[Benjamin1984 563]

1 minute ago, SadFaceHappy said:

Words have meanings.  I let you do your own research on that.

I like the type of player Murray is just fine.  I don't love the offense they run, because it's not very good.  But there are a lot of offenses in the NFL that aren't very good.  I use the term backyard because that's what it is - send a bunch of receivers out and have Kyle run around and make plays.  When it works, great.  But when you can't convert inside the ten, and turn the ball over, you get games like their losses to the Lions and Panthers.

You like Murray.  Cool.  But you're not really contributing to a conversation if you just try to tell other people how they feel.

You don't think it's a backyard offense, and/or Kyle is elite?  Great: tell us why.  Make an argument.  Point out what I'm missing, why I'm wrong to characterize it that way.

But if you're telling me or anyone else how they feel, all you're really doing is emoting yourself.  And that's boring, and meaningless.

Quantify often comes into play when something can't be measured. If you don't know that I don't know what to tell you. You're view is traditionalist. A lot of the things he is doing on the football field can't really be measured because some of them are unorthodox. You like to measure things. So you don't care for it. It isn't for you. An awful lot of his throws are strict timing throws so he wouldn't be running around everywhere. Most of the plays are by design. I think you may have a perception of him that isn't reality. I also think it's possible you haven't watched him play very often by the way you describe him. Regardless, neither one of us is right. I'm not interested in being right. I was interested in challenging your views because you didn't seem very open to interpretation. I'm having a lot of fun watching this guy succeed. I hope you feel the same about players you like.