jason Posted April 25, 2012 Report Share Posted April 25, 2012 Cool ,cool. But there is a difference between liking the Martz hire at the time, and defending him at the end of a two year debacle. You continue to paint with a biased brush. I've admitted to numerous Martz mistakes; your memory just isn't that good. But at the same time I'm open-minded enough to admit that a great majority of Martz issues would have been solved if the front office had actually paid attention to getting Martz the tools required to run a professional offense. The QB was a great step in that direction, but the collection of bad-to-average at OL and WR made his job a virtual impossibility. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mongo3451 Posted April 25, 2012 Report Share Posted April 25, 2012 You continue to paint with a biased brush. I've admitted to numerous Martz mistakes; your memory just isn't that good. But at the same time I'm open-minded enough to admit that a great majority of Martz issues would have been solved if the front office had actually paid attention to getting Martz the tools required to run a professional offense. The QB was a great step in that direction, but the collection of bad-to-average at OL and WR made his job a virtual impossibility. There is a reason the 46 defense is no longer used. It's been figured out and now is just a small piece of any of any teams gameplan. Martz is the exact same parallel. He was too stubborn or ignorant to accept it. He was when we hired him and is now over, forever. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrackerDog Posted April 26, 2012 Report Share Posted April 26, 2012 You continue to paint with a biased brush. I've admitted to numerous Martz mistakes; your memory just isn't that good. But at the same time I'm open-minded enough to admit that a great majority of Martz issues would have been solved if the front office had actually paid attention to getting Martz the tools required to run a professional offense. The QB was a great step in that direction, but the collection of bad-to-average at OL and WR made his job a virtual impossibility. I agree with this, generally, about Martz. Don't agree with you on Urlacher. I loved the pick and wondered early in his first season why they were moving him around so much and didn't settle at MLB immediately. I think lots of people liked/loved the pick. Were you a Plaxico guy? HA! OK OK, this thread has become too meta. What was a thread about Rachal then became about TO and is now about Jason. Silly interwebs. I promise this is my last post on this particular thread. If I want to talk about Jason or TO, I'll do so in a thread dedicated to them! Just kidding. Let's move on kids. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jason Posted April 26, 2012 Report Share Posted April 26, 2012 I agree with this, generally, about Martz. Don't agree with you on Urlacher. I loved the pick and wondered early in his first season why they were moving him around so much and didn't settle at MLB immediately. I think lots of people liked/loved the pick. Were you a Plaxico guy? HA! OK OK, this thread has become too meta. What was a thread about Rachal then became about TO and is now about Jason. Silly interwebs. I promise this is my last post on this particular thread. If I want to talk about Jason or TO, I'll do so in a thread dedicated to them! Just kidding. Let's move on kids. Here I was thinking it was about TO and his physical abilities as it relates to the concept of cutting a player (i.e. Rachal) who doesn't perform up to snuff. Maybe that's why I couldn't get you to agree with the fact that he's still physically better than many others in the NFL. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.