Lori Posted October 8, 2004 Posted October 8, 2004 (Otherwise known as Stuart Scott.) According to ESPN sources in Balto, Lewis will play against Washington this Sunday night, then be suspended for two games (Bills and Eagles) following the cRavens' Week 6 bye.
BF_in_Indiana Posted October 8, 2004 Posted October 8, 2004 Well we will still have to score more then a field goal to win Lori. At least the Justin Bannan appearances may not be so painful.
envirojeff Posted October 8, 2004 Posted October 8, 2004 Saw a crawler on ESPN last night that said that he was out for the season
R. Rich Posted October 8, 2004 Posted October 8, 2004 Gotta love the morality of this one. Let's overreact to the whole Janet Jackson scenario, but when a guy pleads guilty to drug charges, let's just give him a light sentence and a couple weeks off work. Only in America. Or, is it Amurrica?
Mark VI Posted October 8, 2004 Posted October 8, 2004 Gotta love the morality of this one. Let's overreact to the whole Janet Jackson scenario, but when a guy pleads guilty to drug charges, let's just give him a light sentence and a couple weeks off work. Only in America. Or, is it Amurrica? 61307[/snapback] Money, get away Get a good job with more pay and your O.K. Money it's a gas Grab that cash with both hands and make a stash New car, caviar, four star daydream, Think I'll buy me a football team...
Thailog80 Posted October 8, 2004 Posted October 8, 2004 Money, get awayGet a good job with more pay and your O.K. Money it's a gas Grab that cash with both hands and make a stash New car, caviar, four star daydream, Think I'll buy me a football team... 61310[/snapback] Money so they say is the root of all evil today. That song never goes out of style.
VABills Posted October 8, 2004 Posted October 8, 2004 And down here in DC area they are reporting that he may not get suspended and the NFL is going to take their time reviewing it before a decision is made.
stuckincincy Posted October 8, 2004 Posted October 8, 2004 It wil be interesting to see how the Ravens operate without him. I see him a lot on tv, with Bal being in Cin's division. He's a fine rb, but teams seem to run a lot of that 8-in-the-box stuff against the Ravens, and if he pops through it goes for big yards. Against the Ravens, I'd tend tend towards a more conventional def. when he's on the field, and contain. Both Boller and return man Brightful must dip their hands in Crisco - fumbles, fumbles all the time.
Paco Posted October 8, 2004 Posted October 8, 2004 It wil be interesting to see how the Ravens operate without him. I see him a lot on tv, with Bal being in Cin's division. He's a fine rb, but teams seem to run a lot of that 8-in-the-box stuff against the Ravens, and if he pops through it goes for big yards. Against the Ravens, I'd tend tend towards a more conventional def. when he's on the field, and contain. Both Boller and return man Brightful must dip their hands in Crisco - fumbles, fumbles all the time. 61551[/snapback] The problem is that Boller isn't considered a passing threat yet, so teams can focus on Lewis. It's a cliche, but basically...take Lewis out and make Boller beat you, which is a tall task right now. He does show signs of being a really good quarterback sometimes, like vs. KC, but I wonder whether that is actually saying very much.
R. Rich Posted October 8, 2004 Posted October 8, 2004 It wil be interesting to see how the Ravens operate without him. I see him a lot on tv, with Bal being in Cin's division. He's a fine rb, but teams seem to run a lot of that 8-in-the-box stuff against the Ravens, and if he pops through it goes for big yards. Against the Ravens, I'd tend tend towards a more conventional def. when he's on the field, and contain. Both Boller and return man Brightful must dip their hands in Crisco - fumbles, fumbles all the time. 61551[/snapback] The left side of their line, with Mulitalo and Ogden, is very good. When Ogden was out, Jamal suffered. With him back in the lineup, he's been able to run better. As long as those two guys are up front, they can plug in anyone else and be able to get at least decent production from them. Boller is another one of Billick's Frankenstein monsters (see Chris Redman) who doesn't look like he can handle the pros. I could be wrong, but so far, he's shown very little.
Thailog80 Posted October 8, 2004 Posted October 8, 2004 The problem is that Boller isn't considered a passing threat yet, so teams can focus on Lewis. It's a cliche, but basically...take Lewis out and make Boller beat you, which is a tall task right now. He does show signs of being a really good quarterback sometimes, like vs. KC, but I wonder whether that is actually saying very much. 61562[/snapback] Im more worried about Todd Heap than anyone else they have on Offense. I hope his ankle isnt quite ready to play against us. If he plays he'll eat up anyone we can put on him.
Rico Posted October 8, 2004 Posted October 8, 2004 It wil be interesting to see how the Ravens operate without him. I see him a lot on tv, with Bal being in Cin's division. He's a fine rb, but teams seem to run a lot of that 8-in-the-box stuff against the Ravens, and if he pops through it goes for big yards. Against the Ravens, I'd tend tend towards a more conventional def. when he's on the field, and contain. Both Boller and return man Brightful must dip their hands in Crisco - fumbles, fumbles all the time. 61551[/snapback] Brightful is long gone... he just got cut by the Felons the other week. Boller looks better in his 2nd year, but he's still prone to making critical mistakes. IF the Bills show up and play for 60 minutes, The Ravens can be beaten with or without Jamal IMO.
Rico Posted October 8, 2004 Posted October 8, 2004 Im more worried about Todd Heap than anyone else they have on Offense. I hope his ankle isnt quite ready to play against us. If he plays he'll eat up anyone we can put on him. 61565[/snapback] Agree 100%
R. Rich Posted October 8, 2004 Posted October 8, 2004 True, Kelly. In so many ways, the TE position is hurting the Bills. On offense, they're ineffective and on defense, with our problems at safety and with a MLB not known for great coverage skills, they're a factor we have much trouble stopping.
BuffOrange Posted October 8, 2004 Posted October 8, 2004 Gotta love the morality of this one. Let's overreact to the whole Janet Jackson scenario, but when a guy pleads guilty to drug charges, let's just give him a light sentence and a couple weeks off work. Only in America. Or, is it Amurrica? 61307[/snapback] True - we are talking about drugs though - what's worse than that? He would've been better off being involved in a murder like another Lewis on Baltimore, in which case, there is no suspension.
stuckincincy Posted October 8, 2004 Posted October 8, 2004 Brightful is long gone... he just got cut by the Felons the other week.Boller looks better in his 2nd year, but he's still prone to making critical mistakes. IF the Bills show up and play for 60 minutes, The Ravens can be beaten with or without Jamal IMO. 61566[/snapback] Thanks for the update. I'm guilty of accusing the wrong man. Whoever it was, was not good - unless I am confusing teams, which is always possible. I agree - the Ravens are beatable.
R. Rich Posted October 8, 2004 Posted October 8, 2004 Any team that can't score that well is beatable.
Thailog80 Posted October 8, 2004 Posted October 8, 2004 Any team that can't score that well is beatable. 61595[/snapback] Baltimore is looking at us that way also.
Fezmid Posted October 8, 2004 Posted October 8, 2004 Gotta love the morality of this one. Let's overreact to the whole Janet Jackson scenario, but when a guy pleads guilty to drug charges, let's just give him a light sentence and a couple weeks off work. Only in America. Or, is it Amurrica? 61307[/snapback] But it wasn't Janet Jackson that had any penelties (that I heard of), it was CBS for not taking proper precautions. So I don't think they're the same. CW
R. Rich Posted October 8, 2004 Posted October 8, 2004 But it wasn't Janet Jackson that had any penelties (that I heard of), it was CBS for not taking proper precautions. So I don't think they're the same. CW 61607[/snapback] There's no argument here, so don't look for one. My comment was directed at society in general, NOT to CBS or the legal system in particular. The same people who flew off the handle about the Janet Jackson issue don't mind seeing commercials where the underlying message is to lie to people or steal from someone (that one with the rocks in the fridge?) or even promote promiscuity (the one where the guy says,"...I don't even know this woman's name..."). That, to me, is hypocrisy.
Recommended Posts