(10-07-2020, 02:00 PM)reuben.ahmed Wrote: The funny part is it's the o-line or coaching fault when he plays poorly, and it's "he's a good RB" when they play well.

I don't see why both can't be true.  Barry Sanders is the only back I can think of off the top of my head that didn't need a decent line to run behind. 

The line played really well Sunday and Mixon had a great day.  That doesn't mean the only reason he had a great day was because the line played great. He's a good back, but getting hit behind the line is going to make anyone look bad (except the aforementioned Barry Sanders).

(10-07-2020, 02:00 PM)reuben.ahmed Wrote: Only a fool would have expected more. The cool bet is he wouldn't have done any of that without Gio scaring him. "lol". Hindsight is 20/20 and mixon was one of the worst rushers in the league before that game.

The funny part is it's the o-line or coaching fault when he plays poorly, and it's "he's a good RB" when they play well.

The OL is still a bad line. To rush for 151 yards behind a bad line is pretty good feat no matter how you slice it.

 

(10-07-2020, 02:00 PM)reuben.ahmed Wrote: The funny part is it's the o-line or coaching fault when he plays poorly, and it's "he's a good RB" when they play well.

The really funny part is claiming that the people who were right were "fools" but people like you who were wrong were the smart ones.

(10-07-2020, 05:50 PM)fredtoast Wrote: The really funny part is claiming that the people who were right were "fools" but people like you who were wrong were the smart ones.

Fred just dealt a ***** slap.

(10-07-2020, 06:03 PM)Nate (formerly eliminate08) Wrote: Fred just dealt a ***** slap.

Somebody call the police, 'cause that's assault...