Welcome to goTitans.com! Log in or sign up to be a part of the best Tennessee Titans fan site available.

6 "Cancers" on the team.

Discussion in 'Tennessee Titans and NFL Talk' started by TouchdownTitans, Jan 29, 2014.

Watchers:
This thread is being watched by 19 users.
  1. SawdustMan Pro Bowler

    Bishop
    Messages:
    10,370
    Moolah:
    $12,920
    I really think you are wrong about that. The only reason people went to games last year was A) they are diehard Titan fans who show up no matter how awful the team is, or B) they couldn't find anyone dumb enough to buy their tickets.
    GoT high fives this.
  2. The Hammer Out for a rip

    Matthews 2
    Messages:
    14,973
    Moolah:
    $126,045
    I do have to disagree
    1. I cannot see CJ making that big a difference in attendance. The fan base is pretty good. Plus CJ's popularity has declined
    2. I agree that CJ being on the field adds an element that defenses have to prepare for. At the same time defense play him a lot smarter than they used to. As such I believe CJ will never be able to have the impact he once did
    3. Defenses playing him smarter means he is not the HR thread he used to be. Case in point this season CJ's longest run was 30 yards. In all but a few seasons even Eddie George had at least one run more than 30 yards. A HR threat needs to do better

    BTW, noticed you are in upstate NY. Ever go to Bills games? Ever see the Titans play in Buffalo?
  3. Scarecrow CEO of PPO

    Wright
    Messages:
    19,970
    Moolah:
    $38
    they got rid of him 3 years after that mess, then the team moved on and won a super bowl with a running back they drafted in the second.

    you people place too much value on a position that is the most easily replaceable in the league.
    nbtoppers2 and JCBRAVE high five this.
  4. Scarecrow CEO of PPO

    Wright
    Messages:
    19,970
    Moolah:
    $38

    Its also ironic you mention that, since they cut him one year into his three year deal.

    http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=2366529

    [IMG]

    So exactly what point were you trying to make here? That it is somehow acceptable to overpay a guy who isn't producing anymore? History tells us these guys are never the same after seasons like this. Doesn't look like CJ is the exception to the rule.
  5. Kaeotik Pro Bowler

    Pollard
    Messages:
    3,815
    Moolah:
    $8,132
    Can you honestly say if Peyton plays next year, and the Broncos feature RB is CJ, you don't think he tears sh*t up and has many long TD's? If not, you don't really think "he's done."
    titan520 high fives this.
  6. 2ToneBlue Starter

    Messages:
    437
    Moolah:
    $574
    Let's retrace our steps to see how we got here:

    1. You asked why are we paying CJ near AP money
    2. I respond that's the going rate for 2k backs in the last couple decades
    3. You say "Let's get Jamal Lewis"
    4. I point out that even in early 2000's RB's were getting 8mil+ a year (after a couple years past their 2000 yard)
    5. You forgot where we started, I wasn't ever "making a point" just answering your questions

    I've actually suggested cutting Nate Washington (so does rotoworld say it's a possibility) to save money also. So while I don't think it's acceptable to pay CJ that much, it's not abnormal. I hated the run first offense ever since the Super Bowl of 1999. Problem is the coach didn't see it the same way as me, had he listened to me I'm sure we'd have won multiple Super Bowls by now ;)
    titan520 high fives this.
  7. nytitaner Starter

    Messages:
    425
    Moolah:
    $831
    it aint Tommie Campbell, he was cleaning toilets.
  8. UrbanLegend3 Starter

    Hunter
    Messages:
    3,786
    Moolah:
    $10,844
    We signed a contract that looked good at the time. This conversation actually proves my contention that players should get as much money as they absolutely can when they have the chance to make it even if that means holding out. If you get injured or your play slips that "binding contract" that states the team has to pay you what they said they would can get ripped up in front of your face. Why is one party more bound than the other?

    I've always found it hypocritical that people ***** and complain about athletes holding out for more money or asking for a new deal when they're under contract but ownership and fans can call for a guy to get a pay cut or be straight up cut while under the same contract. No one ever gets upset with ownership with cutting a guy who is under contract on moral grounds. It doesn't seem fair and in the overwhelming majority of cases the team has all the leverage and all the player can do is bend over and take it or fight for what he wants and be labeled selfish by the fan base. It really all boils down to the fact that if most of us were in their shoes we'd get as much as we could too.
    nytitaner high fives this.
  9. 1stDownDive Camp Fodder

    Messages:
    5
    Moolah:
    $10
    Actually, you are being very misleading with that stat. If he is arm tackled while at full speed and runs by it that is considered after contact yards. Thats how you break tackles....momentum. Same thing with AP. When he isn't getting yards its because he is being met in the backfield. We had a huge tendency to run on first down. Advantage defense. We used zone-blocking when we had slow linemen. Advantage defense. We ran mostly dives. Advantage defense. Plus we had a chicken wing armed quarterback that couldn't stretch the field. Not to mention we started showing five wide....obviously we are passing. There wasn't any blending between the pass and run downs. No stretch plays mean no play-action...no play-action means no pass threat....which means our offense sputters. When is the last time we ran toss. ..A counter...used apower running scheme with a fullback....how about not running out of the three wide receiver set???
  10. JCBRAVE #getyourlifetogether

    Casey
    Messages:
    41,315
    Moolah:
    $215,094
    CJ needs the best of circumstances to win lol

    Major fail on his part
    GoT high fives this.

Share This Page