Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

I've tried to tell you guys about 30


top dawg
 Share

Recommended Posts

Some of you, all you do is talk sh¡t about Chuba, but all he does is do his job. No, he can't run through walls, but he can run through even some small homes. I said it last year, and Boobie Sanders did nothing to change my mind, Hubbard is our most explosive back. If he gets into the second level, good things generally happen. He's an excellent complement to any RB room in the league. I would tell you to stop underrating him, but you probably won't. Meanwhile, Chuba will keep on chugging, then breaking off explosive runs to move the chains.

  • Poo 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hubbard is fine if there is a hole where it should be as he can hit the hole hard. If the hole isn’t there he flounders like the 4th and 1 where he turned his back and got nothing. He’s complementary/a backup and that’s it. If he’s your starter against a good D, you’re in trouble as we saw last year.

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, top dawg said:

Some of you, all you do is talk sh¡t about Chuba, but all he does is do his job. No, he can't run through walls, but he can run through even some small homes. I said it last year, and Boobie Sanders did nothing to change my mind, Hubbard is our most explosive back. If he gets into the second level, good things generally happen. He's an excellent complement to any RB room in the league. I would tell you to stop underrating him, but you probably won't. Meanwhile, Chuba will keep on chugging, then breaking off explosive runs to move the chains.

Think you said it best - he’s a good complementary back. He’s good at finding holes to sprint through. Our problem is we need a lead back with a good blend of power and speed and Sanders ain’t it.

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Have you seen the mock drafts lately?   Most of them have us taking a QB. Just because you aren't high on these QBs doesn't mean the Panthers or other teams aren't.   If you want me to be real I just think you a Tmac homer and all you care about is us drafting him. It's why you get so defensive when people mention other prospects.   Be open to other people's ideas. Nobody in this thread is saying anything bad about your boy Tmac. 
    • Oh good lord Interest doesn't mean interest in making a bad trade to take the player, that's why I had such a long post, to accurately describe why those are two different things, but you don't like to listen to that stuff.  Being interested in a player doesn't live in a vacuum. It's very simple... there isn't a #1 draft pick type of grade on any of these QB's, if there was, we'd just take them.  You can't bluff a pick everyone knows you won't make, and trying to trade the pick is the CLEAR signal that you're not taking the QB. Just because the Raiders would have interest, doesn't mean they're going to bail us out of a situation we don't want to be in, they'd be smart about it and just sit put, let us take a non QB as we'd be telling the world we're not taking one just by trying to trade the pick, and then they'd take him at #2 (either with their own pick or by trading less to get that one). Oh, and your point of "if nobody is willing to make the trade, you obviously just take the best QB" is quite literally the dumbest thing I've ever read on here. If nobody is willing to trade up to take the QB, then it's OBVIOUS that the QB isn't worth taking with that pick, so OBVIOUSLY taking the best QB there is just OBVIOUSLY stupid and a bad pick. The moral of it is if there is a QB worth taking, we're taking them and not making the trade.  If there isn't a QB worth taking there, nobody is trading up to #1 to take one, we just showed the NFL how bad of an idea that is 2 years ago, it's really not hard to see. You keep making up this mythical situation where there is a QB who has shown to be worth trading up to #1 for and we'll be able to leverage that into a trade.  But we're the most QB needy team in the league, if we end up with the #1 pick, either we are taking a QB #1 or no QB is going #1 unless we get VERY lucky and two teams in the Top 5 fall in love with one prospect and we can play them off each other and fleece one of them. But again, I can't see that happening, as if there was a QB worthy of that, we're just taking him ourselves.
    • Sanders is with Tom Brady brand and that's his mentor. The Raiders owner was with Sanders taking pics at a Vegas game together.   It doesn't take much to connect the dots that Vegas will be interested in Sanders as their franchise QB. Oh yeah and guess who hasa small ownership stake in the Raiders Tom Brady.   I guess this is just another made up Madden idea by me huh?
×
×
  • Create New...