EZC-Boston Posted December 27, 2004 Share Posted December 27, 2004 TH had 3 fumbles lost last year, WM has 2, any day now the bitching should start... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AKC Posted December 27, 2004 Share Posted December 27, 2004 TH had 3 fumbles lost last year, WM has 2, any day now the bitching should start... 180852[/snapback] In addition to being meaningless when analyzing a running back's ability to hang onto the football, "lost fumbles" is an oxymoron. A fumble is ALL READY a lost ball. What happens after that is more a process of how well your teammates clean up after your mess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cugalabanza Posted December 27, 2004 Share Posted December 27, 2004 You need to stir a little bit harder. My advice to you is try more personal attacks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark VI Posted December 27, 2004 Share Posted December 27, 2004 TH had 3 fumbles lost last year, WM has 2, any day now the bitching should start... 180852[/snapback] 6 game winning streak has us all drunk and forgiving. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BRH Posted December 27, 2004 Share Posted December 27, 2004 Just to answer on the merits (for a change), the reason we got all over TH for his fumbling was that he put the ball on the ground something like nine times in 2002 and we lost six of them, if I recall. He did better last year but damn he was a fumble machine in 2002. WM isn't even close to that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
taterhill Posted December 27, 2004 Share Posted December 27, 2004 TH had 3 fumbles lost last year, WM has 2, any day now the bitching should start... 180852[/snapback] you are a 5'7" 200ish lb pile of douchebag Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted December 27, 2004 Share Posted December 27, 2004 I would like someone to tell me how WM could have prevented yesterday's fumble. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ganesh Posted December 27, 2004 Share Posted December 27, 2004 Just to answer on the merits (for a change), the reason we got all over TH for his fumbling was that he put the ball on the ground something like nine times in 2002 and we lost six of them, if I recall. He did better last year but damn he was a fumble machine in 2002. WM isn't even close to that. 180859[/snapback] I think some of TH's fumbles came at cruciale times in the games and caused more heartburn. So far WM's fumbles haven't affected the game, hence the non-bitching. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crackur Posted December 27, 2004 Share Posted December 27, 2004 I honestly think with the new bills..........none of their To's were crucial to them........teh D stood up for them Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted December 27, 2004 Share Posted December 27, 2004 In addition to being meaningless when analyzing a running back's ability to hang onto the football, "lost fumbles" is an oxymoron. A fumble is ALL READY a lost ball. What happens after that is more a process of how well your teammates clean up after your mess. 180854[/snapback] Using that criterion, hasn't Willis "lost" a fumble in each of the last five games then? And maybe two in one of the games, depending on if you blame Willis or Bledsoe for the one on the handoff? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts