Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 16 to 23 of 23
  1. #16

    Re: Mike Anderson suspended for upcoming season



    What does being suspended for the upcoming season have to do with his lack of playing time in 2006? The Bronco game on October 09, 2006 was classic Billick. MA was one of the few Ravens on offense who showed any sign of a pulse that game. He made the mistake of reeling off two straight first downs and never saw the field after that series. Billick had to stick with the starter and his less than 3 yard average in Denver. The coaching was attrocious that game not even taking into account the Clarence Moore play call in the endzone.




  2. #17
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Middle River
    Posts
    4,027
    Blog Entries
    3

    Re: Mike Anderson suspended for upcoming season

    No hints as to why this time on MA. but I did find a blurb saying marijahoochie was the reason for the first suspension
    http://mvn.com/nfl-broncos/2008/06/2...nded-one-year/

    My guess is that his career is over but a chance that he may re-appear similar as Terry Allen did if some team is decimated at the position. But that is a huge improbability with the year wait and staying in some kind of shape... if it was painkillers or cocaine this time, then scratch what I just said, he's preminantly out.
    Didn't play a lot here, but sure had the appearance of a good soldier in the public eye.




  3. #18

    Re: Mike Anderson suspended for upcoming season

    Quote Originally Posted by RustonRifle View Post
    What does being suspended for the upcoming season have to do with his lack of playing time in 2006?
    RR, what you are missing is what you've been missing all along. Your seat on the BLEACHERS is different from the coach's seat at ONE WINNING DRIVE and ON THE SIDELINE, so he has access to information you do not.

    Earth to fans, earth to fans: Something was up with Mike Anderson. Nobody told us what it was, but there may have been a "reason" why he was not playing more than he was.

    You guys who play Monday Morning Quarterback make me laugh. Save this f*ing thread, or at least this post, for a couple years and substitute "Harbaugh" for "Billick" so I can skip having to recreate this post from scratch.

    :brickwall:
    Festivus

    His definitions and arguments were so clear in his own mind that he was unable to understand how any reasonable person could honestly differ with him.




  4. #19

    Re: Mike Anderson suspended for upcoming season

    Well, why was he in the Denver game at all or even on the roster?

    So if this was why MA wasn't playing why was other players on the roster with their off the field issues playing?

    Fact is he was inserted into the Denver game and produced positive results, after reeling off two 10 yard gains he didn't see the field anymore.



    You don't have to have a seat at 1 winning drive to be able to judge whether a 10 yard gain is being productive.

    We have had many players on this team make off the field mistakes if you critcsize MA for it but cheer for the guys still on the roster you come off as a straight up hypocrite.




  5. #20

    Re: Mike Anderson suspended for upcoming season

    RR, I always and pretty much *only* cheer for the guys wearing the jersey right now. You take it off, don't let the door hit you. Really, 90% of them come and go and I don't give a crap. I won't shed a tear for Ray when he goes and I sure as hell didn't shed one for Jamal. I do save a little good will for the ones who show class on and off the field, regardless of their level of on-the-field contributions. I won't be sad to see Ray go, but it pained me to say farewell to Mulitalo.

    Rhetorical questions are not an argument. But I will restate your argument thusly:

    Mike Anderson had success running in one game, and in others as a change-of-pace back. He should have been the starting running back in more games afterward.

    I just don't find that compelling. There's too much you don't know, about game planning, or personnel, or behind the scenes activity, to draw that conclusion from such a small amount of information. Occasional bursts through the line are pretty typical for the change-of-pace back. Musa Smith had pretty good YPC in that role. Zeroue (sp?) backed up Bettis, with higher yards per carry. That doesn't mean he should be a starter, though.

    Look, RR. I know I'm not going to persuade you. But the way I read your argument (and those of others, here and elsewhere), is this: Billick had no rational reason for decision X. Therefore Billick was irrational.

    Which I think is absurd, because for *years* we had a winning team on the field, and yet despite the fact that you know you aren't aware of all the contributing factors, you are still perfectly prepared to "deduce" from the very tiny tip of the iceberg that is the play on the field, that Billick was an irrational fool.

    Not that it wasn't time for him to go, it may have been, but he was not the booger eating moron some of you say he was. Somewhere in the small space that is outside-what-you-know, there may have been a very good reason Mike Anderson was not playing. That's all I'm saying.

    I'm not going to change your mind. This is an old argument.
    Festivus

    His definitions and arguments were so clear in his own mind that he was unable to understand how any reasonable person could honestly differ with him.




  6. #21

    Re: Mike Anderson suspended for upcoming season

    Quote Originally Posted by festivus View Post
    Rhetorical questions are not an argument. But I will restate your argument thusly:

    Mike Anderson had success running in one game, and in others as a change-of-pace back. He should have been the starting running back in more games afterward.

    That's my argument? where did I say that? I only implied the man should have been given more carries in the Denver game that he was one of the few Ravens on offense to have a pulse.


    Quote Originally Posted by festivus View Post
    Look, RR. I know I'm not going to persuade you. But the way I read your argument (and those of others, here and elsewhere), is this: Billick had no rational reason for decision X. Therefore Billick was irrational.

    Which I think is absurd, because for *years* we had a winning team on the field, and yet despite the fact that you know you aren't aware of all the contributing factors, you are still perfectly prepared to "deduce" from the very tiny tip of the iceberg that is the play on the field, that Billick was an irrational fool.

    Not that it wasn't time for him to go, it may have been, but he was not the booger eating moron some of you say he was. Somewhere in the small space that is outside-what-you-know, there may have been a very good reason Mike Anderson was not playing. That's all I'm saying.

    I'm not going to change your mind. This is an old argument.

    First of all where is my complaint that MA didn't get starts? You must know where it is since you accuse me of it.


    Looks like your interjecting all kinds of innuendo and your personal theories and trying to label me or at best implicate your typing as my words, which they aren't.




  7. #22

    Re: Mike Anderson suspended for upcoming season

    Quote Originally Posted by RustonRifle View Post
    That's my argument? where did I say that? I only implied the man should have been given more carries in the Denver game that he was one of the few Ravens on offense to have a pulse.

    First of all where is my complaint that MA didn't get starts? You must know where it is since you accuse me of it.

    Looks like your interjecting all kinds of innuendo and your personal theories and trying to label me or at best implicate your typing as my words, which they aren't.
    Didn't mean to offend. Just trying to understand your argument, once I took out the rhetorical questions.

    My mistake!
    Festivus

    His definitions and arguments were so clear in his own mind that he was unable to understand how any reasonable person could honestly differ with him.




  8. #23

    Re: Mike Anderson suspended for upcoming season

    It's all good Festivus!! I just didn't want anyone getting the impression I wrote those things. I stand by what I write and will admit when I'm wrong. It's just a game. Have a good 1!




Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Russell Street Report Website Design by D3Corp Ocean City Maryland