CultBrennan59
10-07-2012, 09:21 PM
wrong cult. You made the statement that no matter what transpired to RG3, we would have lost the game, period point blank.
My point is that we could not have known what would happen, but if recent history is any indicator of possible outcomes, then my statement is that it would have been very reasonable to assume RG3 had plenty of time, talent and opportunity to win the game. A player of his caliber can very well make a difference in that situation, and it seems that you would dismiss everything he has done over the course of the first quarter of the season, and chalk it up to him performing well against poor defenses and the like. Your statement is ridiculous, but if you would like to keep arguing it, go right ahead. Fact is RG3 is a playmaker, and him leaving the game definitely hindered the team, as well as our chances of coming out of the game with a W, which was WELL WITHIN REACH, no matter how you would spin it.
Coulda, shoulda, woulda; If, If, If. We lost to a great team, I'm not upset. Our QB is expected to play next week, according to reports.
When you watch a game, do you ever have a feel for the game like "I don't see this team winning" or "Theres no way the other team is coming back we got this" or "I don't see us winning"? I had that feeling today when I was watching the Broncos game, our game, our game against the rams, watching the Bears beat up the cowboys, to name a few recent games. I just felt like once RG3 got hurt it just solidified the fact that we weren't going to win the game, and thats why I said with him in there, we probably wouldn't have won from what I saw for 3 quarters (yes, I'll give it to you that he plays his best in the 4th quarter) from our team, Atlanta had a plan and did it well. This is a done subject. On to Minnesota, whom I think we'll beat IF RG3s playing.
My point is that we could not have known what would happen, but if recent history is any indicator of possible outcomes, then my statement is that it would have been very reasonable to assume RG3 had plenty of time, talent and opportunity to win the game. A player of his caliber can very well make a difference in that situation, and it seems that you would dismiss everything he has done over the course of the first quarter of the season, and chalk it up to him performing well against poor defenses and the like. Your statement is ridiculous, but if you would like to keep arguing it, go right ahead. Fact is RG3 is a playmaker, and him leaving the game definitely hindered the team, as well as our chances of coming out of the game with a W, which was WELL WITHIN REACH, no matter how you would spin it.
Coulda, shoulda, woulda; If, If, If. We lost to a great team, I'm not upset. Our QB is expected to play next week, according to reports.
When you watch a game, do you ever have a feel for the game like "I don't see this team winning" or "Theres no way the other team is coming back we got this" or "I don't see us winning"? I had that feeling today when I was watching the Broncos game, our game, our game against the rams, watching the Bears beat up the cowboys, to name a few recent games. I just felt like once RG3 got hurt it just solidified the fact that we weren't going to win the game, and thats why I said with him in there, we probably wouldn't have won from what I saw for 3 quarters (yes, I'll give it to you that he plays his best in the 4th quarter) from our team, Atlanta had a plan and did it well. This is a done subject. On to Minnesota, whom I think we'll beat IF RG3s playing.