You have not used stats to backup your argument. in fact, you said, and i quote "i dont need to post the stats to backup my point" Meanwhile i have provided plenty of statistical analysis. For you to sya you see no validity in my argument is very childish. especially it is based almost entirely on relevent statistics. I'm fine with putitng value in the "eyeball test" and there is some merit to the game showing you some things the stats dont. But you cant just completely disregard the stats for that, and it is MUCH more likely to be biased by what you are watching vs being biased by stats, which are concrete. For instance, Barber is 1 player, tracking what he does is easy. his highlights stand out more. watching the jets, its 4 or 5 different guys. harder to notice the impact that way, or to see they are producing the same thing. I watched every jet game, some multiple times via DVR. I watched maybe 6 or so regular season and all the dallas playoff games. I have not seen them all. Murray was fantastic. The jets group of ball carriers were also fantastic... especially given no passing attack to take the pressure off of them. why you dont want to acknolwedge this is beyond me, the stats state it, and as a jet fan id assume you have seen most or all of their games as well. Maybe the fact that our team sucked and overall offense wasnt good threw off your perception of the run game I've never denied murray did some great things... that was never what i was debating. I was saying the jets running game produced the same thing, just with several players doing it. go back and watch the miami game where we steamrolled them for 277 yards. watch the titans game were we ran all over them late and punched in a game winning touchdown run. The fact that there is nothing i can tell you that will change your mind, in itself shows a very big issue with your argument... if you refuse to be open to other view points possibly being correct, and refuse to believe statistical data, then you basically are being stuborn and dead set on ignorance.
I think he is a good poster as well, I think he just has some preconceived notions he is a bit hard headed about. I'm glad not everyone thinks it is some crazy notion that a stable of lesser backs combined can produce the same results as a much better back
Football is a situational game. Neither stats nor recollection of past plays can put into context what the RB position does on a play-by-play basis. I find it obscure to say the jets RB position was just as good as the Cowboys. It's just not true IMO. RB play is more than yards and TDs. Regardless of our QB situation, opposing D's are more worried about D.Murray than Ivory and company. Arguing for the sake of arguing?
There is nothing to acknowledge in regards to what JerseyJay is saying here, logically speaking the Cowboys running game was better then the Jets running game. All you need to do is watch the games and observe, Murray's impact vs all 3 of our RBs. Pass Protection, Receptions, Rushing - Murray did all 3 things better then all 3 of the Jets RBs combined. Just go back and watch the Cowboys - Bears game. Murray was magnificent, he extended so many drives. The guy was just a beast for the Cowboys. Jets running game didn't do jack shit against the Bears. Same with the Lions game actually too, one of the stingiest run defenses in the league.
