Plaxico wouldn't have hurt my feelings any.. Oh wait, we got the great Travis Taylor... never mind... :grbac: :ralph:
Printable View
Plaxico wouldn't have hurt my feelings any.. Oh wait, we got the great Travis Taylor... never mind... :grbac: :ralph:
I equate the drafting of Jamal as a sign that the Front office and the coaching staff felt a need to grab a running back in the first round. Had they thought they would of needed a LB they may have grabbed Urlacher but there wasnt a need for that as we were stack in that position.Quote:
The fact that you seem to equate the drafting of Jamal Lewis with Brian Billick not using Holmes adequately for the half a season he had to work with him in 1999 is amusing.
Who cares who said it? What if Art said it or Ray? Billick never got the production out of Priest the way Vermeil did. You asked for a player who Billick didnt get the most out of, I think that player is Priest. You dont have to agree with that but if you line up the stats Billick hardly used him effectively the way KC did. That's all.Quote:
Ozzie said that Priest was the 5th best back in the AFC Central. Priest clearly wasn't in the Ravens plans when Billick was hired.
Wow. A debate about Priest Holmes vs. Jamal Lewis, where somebody is complaining it is Billick's fault Priest Holmes did not put up his KC numbers here.
Just. Wow.
Hook we had two RBs on the roster. One was going to start. The other would have to take a huge pay cut to stay. As I recall they were even represented by the same agent, who even *told* the organization only one was going to stay a Raven. We went with Jamal and won the Super Bowl, something the Chiefs never did with Priest.
I was glad for Priest to cash in and have success elsewhere, but each team only gets to have one starting running back, and we did pretty well with #31 for awhile there. Let it go.
No one is complainng about Billick.Quote:
Wow. A debate about Priest Holmes vs. Jamal Lewis, where somebody is complaining it is Billick's fault Priest Holmes did not put up his KC numbers here.
Did Billick get the same production out of Priest as the KC did? The answer is no, so he didnt get the most out of him. Thats all.
Priest was on that team too :happyanimQuote:
We went with Jamal and won the Super Bowl, something the Chiefs never did with Priest.
Meh. Call it want you want, you are whining about Billick.
Priest was on that team in his role as the back up. That was his role. We won the Super Bowl under utilizing him. So I don't see your complaint.
I wish in our new smileys we had one called :shrug:, if we did, I'd put it here.
Billick had both backs in 2000 and he used Priest quite effectively, but given our talent there is no doubt who the best back FOR US was at the time. Or are you going to claim Priest played better than Jamal in 2000?
In 1999 Priest was used quite well WHEN HE WAS HEALTHY. You can try and ignore his injuries and claim it was Billick's fault he wasn't more productive in 1999 and you might have a point if Billick were the trainer or team doctor.
Beyond that blaming Billick for Priest leaving is idiotic and just oozes Billick hate. Before Billick was even here Ozzie Newsome said Priest was the 5th best back in the AFC Central. He makes the personnel decisions, if you can't put two and two together regarding the signing of Rhett and then the drafting of Jamal let me try and help. OZZIE MISSED ON PRIEST, NOT BILLICK!
Me too. My comment about jamal has been disected way too much. But I still stand by it because in the end the entire ravens organiztion thought a rookie Running back was the way to go and as you say, priest was deemed a backup, when he clearly was not.Quote:
I wish in our new smileys we had one called :shrug:, if we did, I'd put it here.
he was under utilized, he was an unknown weapon that we could have used more effectively but choose to keep him on the bench.Quote:
Billick had both backs in 2000 and he used Priest quite effectively, but given our talent there is no doubt who the best back FOR US was at the time. Or are you going to claim Priest played better than Jamal in 2000?
Keep on the bench? He started the first several games while Jamal healed from a separated elbow. He was used as a WR and got plenty of time spelling Jamal. Jamal out-played him, plain and simple.
Greg I wouldn't even go that far. Remember our OL was a bunch of road-grader types, for whom Priest was not well suited as a (McGahee-style) slasher and pass catcher. Nobody "missed" on Priest, we had Jamal instead, whose numbers may not have been as gaudy but who was well suited to our team.
Good god. Most of the Billick haters do not go this far, and point to the Super Bowl winning team as one that was mismanaged by Billick. Seriously, criticizing a SB winning team for its failure to take better advantage of a backup running back is bizarre.
http://www.nndb.com/people/349/000087088/boller-1.jpg
He was the beginning of the end for both Billick and Fassel.
If the Ravens missed on Priest, then so did a lot of other teams as well.
KC signed Priest on the first day of the draft (not at the beginning of March when the FA market opened) in 2001, after they didn't select a RB. At one point, the Ravens thought they had a chance to retain him as a back-up because no one wanted to offer him even a shot at a starting gig. He was signed to a small contract and he was sharing carries for the first couple of games - even KC didn't know what they had at that point.