Ok 2-1 and we go to KC next Week

[Rome]

Are you serious?

Someone can kill a us without them winning the game. If Priest rushes for 200 on sunday and the Eagles win, he didn't kill us?

Get back on your meds.

A guy could run for 400 yards on the Eagles but if the Eagles won the game it wouldn't mean shtein.

Stats are for losers and the definition of killing another team always, and I mean ALWAYS involves winning.  If it didn't they wouldn't keep score.

[WEST is GOD]

"Killing" a team means having a very good game... winning or losing is irrelevant.

The involvement of winning may be your definition, but that doesn't say much since you seem to be on another planet with this debate.

Are you telling me you never watched a football game where say the score was 14-14 and one team has a RB that is busting off big run after big run, and you never heard an announcer say something like "Man he is absolutely killing them out there." If not you've never watched football.

When players have good games, it gives their team a better chance to win, as opposed to them having bad games.

It's not rocket science people.

[WEST is GOD]

and I should add, your stat comment is laughable.

Are you telling me that if you didn't know the final score ahead of time, and you look at the stats for the Eagles/Chiefs game and you saw Westbrook had 150 yards rushing, TO had 170 yards receiving, Mcnabb had 450 yards passing and 6 TDs, that you wouldn't assume they won the game as opposed to Westbrook having 30 rushing yards, TO having 40 receiving yards and Mcnabb having 150 passing yards and 0 TDs?

Stats are important during games for outcomes.

[Rome]

Stats don't mean shtein.

And you're ugly.

[WEST is GOD]

So according to your logic Mcnabb could have an equally good game with 450 passing yards and 6 TDs than 150 passing yards and no TDs.

I'm talking about individuals here. This is how the whole thing started. Someone said TG doesn't scare them. They didn't say the Chiefs didn't scare them. So if you are talking about a team game, this isn't what this particular argument is about. This argument is about individuals.

[Rome]

Why are you arguing with me?

I said what I said.  Stats (other than wins and losses) don't mean shtein.

If McNabb wins the game where he throws for 150 and loses the game where he tosses 6 touchdowns, the one he wins is more impressive.  What part of that don't you understand?

[WEST is GOD]

Why are you arguing with me?

I said what I said.  Stats (other than wins and losses) don't mean shtein.

If McNabb wins the game where he throws for 150 and loses the game where he tosses 6 touchdowns, the one he wins is more impressive.  What part of that don't you understand?

If Mcnabb wins? I thought the team was called the Eagles, not the Mcnabbs. I told you in my last post this debate isn't about the team, it's about individuals. This particular debate started about individual performances. Winning and losing had nothing to do with this argument. This recent discussion was about what type of day TG was going to have against the Eagles.

If Mcnabb had 450 yards and 6 TDs in a loss, it is more impressive than 150 and no TDs and a win for Mcnabb. It isn't more impressive for the Eagles though, but we aren't talking about the team aspect of the game right now. That is what you don't seem to understand.

[Wingspan]

Someone can kill a us without them winning the game. If Priest rushes for 200 on sunday and the Eagles win, he didn't kill us?

no.

eagles win.

why would i care about anything else?

if holmes rushes for 200 yards, and the eagles win 31-14...is holmes gonna say "yeah i killed them"

[Rome]

Someone can kill a us without them winning the game. If Priest rushes for 200 on sunday and the Eagles win, he didn't kill us?

no.

eagles win.

why would i care about anything else?

if holmes rushes for 200 yards, and the eagles win 31-14...is holmes gonna say "yeah i killed them"

Don't even bother.  Mr. Fantasy Football thinks stats mean more than wins & losses.

Let him wallow in ignorance.

Meanwhile, I'll sit here and wish that Tom Brady was our quarterback.  You know, the guy with three Super Bowl wins and nary a playoff loss.  Ever.

[WEST is GOD]

When did wins and losses even become a part of this argument? I'm not talking about wins and losses, and I'm not a fantasy football stat geek either. I know wins and losses are the most important thing, but once again this particular debate isn't about wins and losses. Once in a while I would like to go deeper, and talk about individual performances for a change.

[Rome]

Are you serious?

Someone can kill a us without them winning the game. If Priest rushes for 200 on sunday and the Eagles win, he didn't kill us?

Get back on your meds.

A guy could run for 400 yards on the Eagles but if the Eagles won the game it wouldn't mean shtein.

Stats are for losers and the definition of killing another team always, and I mean ALWAYS involves winning.  If it didn't they wouldn't keep score.

You brought up the wins & losses in the initial post I responded to.

Try reading instead of typing for a change.

Dope.

[WEST is GOD]

No I didn't, Wingspan brought up wins and losses. You tell me to read, don't be a hypocrite. That is what happens when you jump into someone else's debate while trying to be the hero.

If you are too lazy to go back I will quote the post.

have the giants beaten the eagles since shockey was drafted by them other than the 10-7 game at the end of the season his rookie year?

boo williams? you cant be farging serious with that.

anderson didnt win the game, and the falcons have been the eagles in a long while....

you need to re-evaluate your use of discriptive words

That is when wins and losses was unnecessarily brought into the argument.

[Rome]

My contribution to this thread was to refute your insistence that statistics were more important than wins and losses.

I did that.

So stop backpedaling and own up to it.

[WEST is GOD]

Wins and losses are far more important than statistics, and I never said nor tried to imply they weren't. I never even brought up wins and losses into this argument because this argument was about an individual. You don't always have to talk about wins and losses when discussing a game. Some people like myself, are interested in discussing how you think individual players will do without relating it to a win or a loss.

If you don't want to discuss anything but wins and losses then this debate isn't for you, bub. Just because I don't want to talk about wins and losses right now doesn't mean I don't think they are important.

[Rome]

Wins and losses are far more important than statistics

I win.

I have nothing further to contribute here.