Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Da'rick Rogers

142 posts in this topic

Posted

Bad QB excuse huh? lol

What about false statement on the stats their Global? You going to glaze over that part??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

KKL, sorry but we're comparing Rogers to Patton. Please quit the Lafail thing.

Boy check yourself. You can't tell me a dam thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Bad QB excuse huh? lol

Well, if this is toward me and not KKL, I just wanna say Im not blaming bad QB for Patton.

Even though, in a weaker conference, when Patton gets to play tougher opponents he still produce with a "bad qb". Rogers did good, but not great even with a "better" QB.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Boy check yourself. You can't tell me a dam thing.

LOL. I can agree with you on everything else. Just not Lafail.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

What about false statement on the stats their Global? You going to glaze over that part??

He is faster, whether or not you want to acknowledged that. How fast is irrelevant as I didnt specify.

I retract my stronger comment, although Rodgers is physically a bigger more imposing player.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

He is faster, whether or not you want to acknowledged that. How fast is irrelevant as I didnt specify.

I retract my stronger comment, although Rodgers is physically a bigger more imposing player.

Whatever dude just admit you may have overstated and move on.

.06 seconds isn't considerd faster in football. Rogers is pretty much the same as Lafell. Both are big #2 possession WR. That's it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Whatever dude just admit you may have overstated and move on.

.06 seconds isn't considerd faster in football. Rogers is pretty much the same as Lafell. Both are big #2 possession WR. That's it.

And I think Rodgers will be a better number 2 than Lafell.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

And I think Rodgers will be a better number 2 than Lafell.

that, I can agree.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I'd also like to point out your whole 1,000 yard argument is pretty petty as well.

Rogers had the the 1 season of 1,040 yards and 9 td but Lafell had 929 yards and 8td 1 season.

So really splitting hairs on that. Not to mention Rogers only had the 1 good year. Lafell was good for 3 years in college.

http://www.cfbstats.com/2007/player/365/1001715/index.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

And I think Rodgers will be a better number 2 than Lafell.

You can think that all you want doesn't mean it will come true.

I thought Jarret would be a great #2 but that didn't happen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Guess we will have to "wait and see" .....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Guess we will have to "wait and see" .....

Avatar Bet???

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites