Red Posted September 19, 2009 Posted September 19, 2009 Can't say I was ever very impressed with the O-line play under McNally. Between having mostly inadequate centers, Walker who was never that highly regarded when he was brought from Oakland, Dockery who left his heart in DC, and Peters who couldn't believe he was making less to much less than the rest of these immobile turds, the magnitude of the last few years' O-line problems is completely obvious. I don't think it's McNally's fault. It seems like he did favor those roadgrader-type lineman, the FO just never got in guys with the proper motivation and/or talent. It's obvious Kugler favors more mobile, slightly smaller guys with a nasty attitude. After watching the NE game, especially on a screen pass when Hangartner got out in space and basically layed out to make a block on a defender to spring Freddy, I'm very much liking this O-line. I think Kugler wanted this group of guys together and so guys like Langston/Dockery may have gotten screwed a bit. But where was Vince Wilfork in that game? This O-line has a ways to go to become a cohesive, dominant unit but I feel more optimistic about them then I have in at least the last 5 years. They at least seem to have a high sense of pride in doing their job well. Or when Eric Wood swept right and threw a DB about 8-10 yards backwards just as the play was over. . I love these guys!
sleaky72 Posted September 19, 2009 Posted September 19, 2009 No takers for Big L yet Must say i am a Little surprised. He was not a bad right tackle
supertutor13 Posted September 20, 2009 Posted September 20, 2009 My point is that San Jose Bills fan stated Cal-Berkeley was a top 5 academic school in the country, and it is not by any objective measure. As a public school, it is good bang for the buck, but is not in the same company as many of the Ivys, Duke, Stanford etc... And your point is? It's a fact that Cal is one of the best schools in the US, especially if you measure bang for your buck, it being a public school and all. Personally, I'd say that UCLA doesn't belong anywhere near ahead of Berkeley, but that's just me (and my in-laws, UCLA alums both, will have my hide for saying that). Walker, too, is a smart guy, there's no doubt about that. Perhaps a bit too smart to buy into some of the rah rah aspects of the NFL--he may prefer to cash a paycheck while expending minimal effort to earn same and with minimal impact on his long-term health prospects that the League can cause. Just ask Kyle Turley, the latest victim of the long-term effects of playing in the NFL as per Florio yesterday.....
Endless Ike Posted September 20, 2009 Posted September 20, 2009 My point is that San Jose Bills fan stated Cal-Berkeley was a top 5 academic school in the country, and it is not by any objective measure. As a public school, it is good bang for the buck, but is not in the same company as many of the Ivys, Duke, Stanford etc... As a University, Cal-Berkeley is easily top 10 in the country...the strength and depth of its graduate programs are fantastic. if we're talking just Undergrad then it's hard to argue its better than Harvard, Yale, Princeton, Stanford or MIT. I'd say its easily a better all-around school than Duke, or any of the ivies that aren't HYP
dave mcbride Posted September 20, 2009 Posted September 20, 2009 My point is that San Jose Bills fan stated Cal-Berkeley was a top 5 academic school in the country, and it is not by any objective measure. As a public school, it is good bang for the buck, but is not in the same company as many of the Ivys, Duke, Stanford etc... Um, trust me, it is. UC-Berkeley is one of the ten best institutions in the world by most measures.
iinii Posted September 20, 2009 Posted September 20, 2009 Um, trust me, it is. UC-Berkeley is one of the ten best institutions in the world by most measures. in u.s.news ranking they are twenty one, behind harvard and the m.i.t's of the world. the one thing is that if you are a cal resident the tuition is extremely less expensive than the twenty schools above them.
Recommended Posts