Moss and Samuels Headed to Pro Bowl

SkinzCanes · Post by **SkinzCanes** » Thu Dec 22, 2005 1:24 am

It sucks that Cool

ey didn't make it but it's hard to argue against Mack Strong. The guy is the lead blocker for Alexander who is on the verge of breaking Emmitt's single season td record. Cool

ey simply got screwed because he plays a position that isn't very common in the NFL. Portis getting snubed bothers me more than any of our snubs. He has almost as many yards as Dunn, twice as many td's, and is a far superior blocker. Hopefully some of our alternates end up getting in.

cvillehog · Post by **cvillehog** » Thu Dec 22, 2005 1:45 am

Come on,

ey is effectively a tight end. He should have been considered at that spot, and should've gone in place of Crumpler.

Chris Luva Luva · Post by **Chris Luva Luva** » Thu Dec 22, 2005 4:15 am

Anyone who voted for him deserves to get kicked in the sack.

SkinsChic · Post by **SkinsChic** » Thu Dec 22, 2005 8:40 am

brains?

tcwest10 · Post by **tcwest10** » Thu Dec 22, 2005 8:59 am

I'm glad we got some guys in, although I agree with most that the selection process is skewed.
As for Mr. Vick, I just wanted to say, "Drop the weapon".

dnpmakkah · Post by **dnpmakkah** » Thu Dec 22, 2005 9:18 am

Chris Luva Luva wrote:

Anyone who voted for him deserves to get kicked in the sack.

On Cold Pizza this morning they were dicussing this very issue. Woody was defending the choice saying Vick deserves it because he is a very "exciting" player(total BS) and Skip Bayless went off saying that Mark Brunell should be there in place of Vick.

He then went on to give some stats on both players and basically proved that there is NO way that Vick should have went to the Prowbowl this year in comparison to Brunell's 20 touchdowns and only 8 interceptions.

Warmother · Post by **Warmother** » Thu Dec 22, 2005 9:18 am

Chris Luva Luva wrote:

Anyone who voted for him deserves to get kicked in the sack.

I guess you have to pick the 2 weapons he has out of three. Very easy test, his arm and legs for Mr. Mexico. :lol:

Redskin in Canada · Post by **Redskin in Canada** » Thu Dec 22, 2005 10:33 am

Is there ANY question now that there is an ANTI-SKINS bias in about every aspect of the game?

I mean from the referees, to the media, to the HOF voters, to the Pro-Bowl selection "Committee"?

It was all fun and joy to beat the Pukes in that manner last week. But did anybody notice several unwarranted penalties called against us in that game? They probably would have made the difference in a close game. That is why we need to win big, without a doubt, from now on.

Until we WIN big games, not one or two important games, but consistently from now on, we will not be back on the good side of the fairweather people in each category above.

SkinsJock · Post by **SkinsJock** » Thu Dec 22, 2005 10:58 am

Redskin in Canada wrote:Is there ANY question now that there is an ANTI-SKINS bias in about every aspect of the game?
Until we WIN big games, not one or two important games, but consistently from now on, we will not be back on the good side of the fairweather people in each category above.

You might have something there! But it really is a shame that this program, IF it gets back to being a "force" could mean that some "people" will look at us differently. :hmm:

For example - Art Monk = all of a sudden, "the sleazy one" says "it's time"! And that because the 2005 Redskins team is "respectable" and "in" again? I mean, I think that RiC is close to a fact here.
I remember some here (THN) saying that if a guy belongs in the HOF then he should be there - there should be no "oh well, it's time to get Monk in now"! If he belongs (and I know he does) then put him in there! :thump:

I also agree that there is a number of times recently when calls have not gone our way, and BTW, have you noticed how many calls are being made in favor of the NY media darlings this year? Man I hate that bunch and am looking for a lot of corrective action this week.