Danny O'Neil claims Coleman "beat out" Mike Rob

The Essential Online Seahawks Fan Forum Community. There simply is NO substitute. RATING: PG-13
  • On top of that, he said he hopes for no performance drop-off now that we have Robinson.

    You guys catch that yesterday?

    O'Neil is such a clown.
    User avatar
    BigBallsPete
    NET Bench Warmer
     
    Posts: 40
    Joined: Mon Aug 29, 2011 6:06 pm


  • He's a flippin moron, coleman isn't nearly as effective as MRob at fullback from what i've seen. Not saying he can't be better down the road, but this year i think we do better with MRob back there.
    World Champs - Sounds good don't it
    User avatar
    hawker84
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3986
    Joined: Wed Oct 10, 2012 2:22 pm
    Location: Tri Cities, WA


  • Highly doubt it. If MRob was healthy, I'm almost certain Ware/Coleman would've been on PS ans MRob asked to take a pay cut.
    User avatar
    -The Glove-
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 7034
    Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2011 12:12 am


  • BigBallsPete wrote:On top of that, he said he hopes for no performance drop-off now that we have Robinson.

    You guys catch that yesterday?

    O'Neil is such a clown.


    That's just silly. I wonder if Danny was enamored with Coleman's preseason pass catching and adequate blocking? Lockette tweeted that Marshawn damn near came to tears when MikeRob entered the locker room. That's surely a sign that his lead blocking will take a step backward, LOL!
    User avatar
    HawKnPeppa
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2634
    Joined: Sat Oct 31, 2009 8:01 pm


  • What's wrong with saying that Coleman beat out a guy who had lost 40 pounds from an illness and was hospitalized? Can't play fullback from a hospital bed
    User avatar
    Missing_Clink
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2406
    Joined: Mon Mar 12, 2012 9:53 am


  • He just makes provocative comments as part of his profession. MikeRob is an ox!
    The Moment: Image
    User avatar
    TwilightError
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 580
    Joined: Sat Aug 25, 2012 5:28 am


  • Missing_Clink wrote:What's wrong with saying that Coleman beat out a guy who had lost 40 pounds from an illness and was hospitalized? Can't play fullback from a hospital bed


    To say Coleman "beat out" Robinson infers he outperformed MRob on the field
    User avatar
    -The Glove-
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 7034
    Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2011 12:12 am


  • Yeah, why would we want a Pro Bowler in there? smh
    60 percent of the time..........it works........every time
    User avatar
    SoulfishHawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2811
    Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2012 9:59 am
    Location: Sammamish, WA


  • It was a bit of a "Perfect Storm" to use MRob own words. Him being ill, combined with his salary and the influx of young, cheap talent all in the crucible of a potential Championship run. That wasn't much of a choice or a competition. The one thing that wasn't counted on is the fact that Lynch seemingly never fully embraced the change and has not fully trusted the blocking of the Heir apparent. The bond between he and MRob was an intangible that to a guy like Lynch is a really big piece of the pie. I am under no illusion that this is a long term solution. But for now I cant wait for the first time MRob blows Chris Long to the side Monday night to spring his best friend for a Beastly Ramble. Then we will know that this Championship aspiration of ours truly has some teeth!

    Welcome Back Michael Robinson!

    Go Hawks.
    #NEXTMANUP
    User avatar
    Evil_Shenanigans
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2481
    Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 8:15 am


  • You simply cannot put a price on having Lynch's trust. Thank God MRob is back!
    Image

    Les "The Radish" Norton - Ambassador/Grandfather of .NET, gone too soon but will never be forgotten. RIP
    User avatar
    Aros
    [[ .NET Godfather ]]
     
    Posts: 8081
    Joined: Fri Feb 23, 2007 12:58 am
    Location: Just 6 miles from Richard Sherman!


  • Is danny o neil that midget who knows nothing about football whos co-host is that brock guy?
    User avatar
    Axx
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2539
    Joined: Sun Oct 28, 2012 12:37 pm


  • Nice article about it in our newspaper this morning. I'd post it but if you don't subscribe to our paper they charge for access to their files.

    Its from MikeRobs side and he said just what is posted above, he was ill, making more money than any fullback in the league.

    The team had to make a decision, keep him and pay him $2.5 million or cut him and take a chance on younger talent. That experiment didn't work as well as they hoped because it takes a while for a new blocker to "get it" about that position.

    I'd now be interested in what happens next year.

    :les:
    Image
    On to week two. Week one was not a fluke!
    User avatar
    The Radish
    * NET Radish *
     
    Posts: 18655
    Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 8:18 pm
    Location: Spokane, Wa.


  • Missing_Clink wrote:What's wrong with saying that Coleman beat out a guy who had lost 40 pounds from an illness and was hospitalized? Can't play fullback from a hospital bed


    This. Someone post O'Neal's actual quote? I get the impression that people are reading way too into this.
    If Robinson can't take the field he did get beat out by default. There is nothing inaccurate or misinformed about this statement.
    Give me some damn skittles...
    User avatar
    Basis4day
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3200
    Joined: Mon Aug 15, 2011 11:57 am


  • Coleman DID beat out Mike Rob. The fact that Mike Rob was down to 180lbs, using a walker and set to make $2.5m obviously played a huge factor in it, but Coleman STILL beat him. Could Coleman beat out a HEALTHY Mike Rob? Probably not, but lucky for Coleman, he didn't have to...

    And FWIW, I really like Danny O'Neil. His strange fetish for bow ties notwithstanding. I think he's a pretty sharp guy. He does his homework and knows his stuff, unlike half the chuckleheads on this board these days...
    Radish, check your PMs. Man upstairs has an invite for a tail gate up in heaven with your name on it.
    User avatar
    CANHawk
    * Gangnameister *
     
    Posts: 11321
    Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2009 3:29 pm
    Location: PoCompton, BC Canada


Re: Danny O'Neil claims Coleman
Wed Oct 23, 2013 7:53 am
  • -The Glove- wrote:
    Missing_Clink wrote:What's wrong with saying that Coleman beat out a guy who had lost 40 pounds from an illness and was hospitalized? Can't play fullback from a hospital bed


    To say Coleman "beat out" Robinson infers he outperformed MRob on the field


    Mike Rob wasn't even on the field because he was sick. He couldn't play. Coleman beat him out and outperformed him by default.
    User avatar
    Missing_Clink
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2406
    Joined: Mon Mar 12, 2012 9:53 am


  • Missing_Clink wrote:
    -The Glove- wrote:
    Missing_Clink wrote:What's wrong with saying that Coleman beat out a guy who had lost 40 pounds from an illness and was hospitalized? Can't play fullback from a hospital bed


    To say Coleman "beat out" Robinson infers he outperformed MRob on the field


    Mike Rob wasn't even on the field because he was sick. He couldn't play. Coleman beat him out and outperformed him by default.


    I understand that
    User avatar
    -The Glove-
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 7034
    Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2011 12:12 am


  • O'Neill is an ass kisser and I get so tired of his faked laugh that he makes overly loud. He has some occasional good points but then he gets arrogant and says the stupidest isht! He even overrides Brock sometimes which is completely ignorant.

    Danny is very knowledgeable, but he needs to tone it down some with his "volume."

    And to say Coleman outperformed Robinson on the field appears to be an attempt to kiss up to Pete and John, but it's far from reality. Someone as smart as Mr. O'Neill should know that "outperforming" someone, or something means a head to head competition under similar conditions.
    "God Bless the Seattle Seahawks" Cortez Kennedy
    User avatar
    ivotuk
    * NET Nobody *
     
    Posts: 8401
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 7:29 pm
    Location: North Pole, Alaska


  • I don't see much of a performance drop-off with MRob coming back, maybe Mike getting his playing legs and wind back in this game vs the Rams, I think Lynch will have his best rushing performance of the year with MRod back in front of him.... I see 120+ yds from Lynch in this game.
    User avatar
    Johnny
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 586
    Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 10:16 am
    Location: At a McDonald's inside a Walmart.


  • CANHawk wrote:Coleman DID beat out Mike Rob. The fact that Mike Rob was down to 180lbs, using a walker and set to make $2.5m obviously played a huge factor in it, but Coleman STILL beat him. Could Coleman beat out a HEALTHY Mike Rob? Probably not, but lucky for Coleman, he didn't have to...

    And FWIW, I really like Danny O'Neil. His strange fetish for bow ties notwithstanding. I think he's a pretty sharp guy. He does his homework and knows his stuff, unlike half the chuckleheads on this board these days...


    grasping much there.. 180 lbs? LOL.. Just pulling numbers out our butt now eh ;) 212 was the number.. but hey whats 32 lbs right?
    Teqneek
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 280
    Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2011 12:18 pm


  • Teqneek wrote:
    CANHawk wrote:Coleman DID beat out Mike Rob. The fact that Mike Rob was down to 180lbs, using a walker and set to make $2.5m obviously played a huge factor in it, but Coleman STILL beat him. Could Coleman beat out a HEALTHY Mike Rob? Probably not, but lucky for Coleman, he didn't have to...

    And FWIW, I really like Danny O'Neil. His strange fetish for bow ties notwithstanding. I think he's a pretty sharp guy. He does his homework and knows his stuff, unlike half the chuckleheads on this board these days...


    grasping much there.. 180 lbs? LOL.. Just pulling numbers out our butt now eh ;) 212 was the number.. but hey whats 32 lbs right?


    http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/sarcasm
    Radish, check your PMs. Man upstairs has an invite for a tail gate up in heaven with your name on it.
    User avatar
    CANHawk
    * Gangnameister *
     
    Posts: 11321
    Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2009 3:29 pm
    Location: PoCompton, BC Canada


  • Like others have said, Danny is technically correct. I mean Mike Rob was extremely sick, making a lot of money, not a good mix this day and age for veteran players.
    Image
    User avatar
    Blitzer88
    * NET Eeyore *
     
    Posts: 11044
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 7:47 am
    Location: Pasco, WA


  • CANHawk wrote:
    Teqneek wrote:
    CANHawk wrote:Coleman DID beat out Mike Rob. The fact that Mike Rob was down to 180lbs, using a walker and set to make $2.5m obviously played a huge factor in it, but Coleman STILL beat him. Could Coleman beat out a HEALTHY Mike Rob? Probably not, but lucky for Coleman, he didn't have to...

    And FWIW, I really like Danny O'Neil. His strange fetish for bow ties notwithstanding. I think he's a pretty sharp guy. He does his homework and knows his stuff, unlike half the chuckleheads on this board these days...


    grasping much there.. 180 lbs? LOL.. Just pulling numbers out our butt now eh ;) 212 was the number.. but hey whats 32 lbs right?


    http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/sarcasm


    See also: http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=canhawk
    President of the Perfect Parents Society - est. 2013
    User avatar
    JesterHawk
    * Smackmeister *
     
    Posts: 7037
    Joined: Wed Jan 27, 2010 5:56 pm


  • That's right bitch. CANHawk can NOT be defined. He is too amazing to be defined by normal words. You'd need several pictures and at least one instance of improper touching to be able to define CANHawk...
    Radish, check your PMs. Man upstairs has an invite for a tail gate up in heaven with your name on it.
    User avatar
    CANHawk
    * Gangnameister *
     
    Posts: 11321
    Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2009 3:29 pm
    Location: PoCompton, BC Canada


  • ivotuk wrote:O'Neill is an ass kisser and I get so tired of his faked laugh that he makes overly loud. He has some occasional good points but then he gets arrogant and says the stupidest isht! He even overrides Brock sometimes which is completely ignorant.

    Danny is very knowledgeable, but he needs to tone it down some with his "volume."

    And to say Coleman outperformed Robinson on the field appears to be an attempt to kiss up to Pete and John, but it's far from reality. Someone as smart as Mr. O'Neill should know that "outperforming" someone, or something means a head to head competition under similar conditions.



    I used to listen to Brock and Salk but with Danny there it is just unbearable. His extended GIRLEY giggle belongs on an Ophra Winfrey show. For someone whom probable never owned a set of cleats he sure is given a lot of leeway in providing his opinion. I think all in all KJR is much more informative and entertaining. Especially SOFTTY!
    scakfan
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 110
    Joined: Fri Jan 04, 2013 11:55 pm


  • To clarify, Danny was definitely insinuating that Coleman outperformed Robinson on the field. He wasn't saying the Robinson got sick and Coleman won the job by default.

    This isn't the first time either, over the past few months every time the MRob topic has come up, Danny has made comments to that effect. It's a ludicrous position that I wish Brock would call him on.
    User avatar
    BigBallsPete
    NET Bench Warmer
     
    Posts: 40
    Joined: Mon Aug 29, 2011 6:06 pm


  • To be fair to Danny, didn't a few prominent Seahawk bloggers predict Ware and/or Coleman would "beat out" Mike Rob before he got ill (w/ cap hit and age factored in, of course)? And those guys did look good in pre-season. In retrospect, I think there definitely was a chance Mike Rob would have lost this job even if healthy, though I would've considered it a mistake. His illness just made it harder for him to fight for it. However, I agree that saying Mike Rob was "outperformed" during pre-season isn't fair.
    User avatar
    DavidSeven
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3743
    Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2013 9:15 am


  • BigBallsPete wrote:To clarify, Danny was definitely insinuating that Coleman outperformed Robinson on the field. He wasn't saying the Robinson got sick and Coleman won the job by default.

    This isn't the first time either, over the past few months every time the MRob topic has come up, Danny has made comments to that effect. It's a ludicrous position that I wish Brock would call him on.


    Can we have the quote? I still don't see what is so ridiculous about it (Though you're free to disagree with Danny's opinion). MRob missed preseason games and it's Danny's job to cover the team. He also has access to coaches and personnel that we don't. We never saw what Mike Rob was like in a regular season game, so the best any fan can go off is their own preference.

    I like Mike Rob's play as much as the next fan, but my opinion is entirely based on what i saw last year. Same as most fans.
    Give me some damn skittles...
    User avatar
    Basis4day
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3200
    Joined: Mon Aug 15, 2011 11:57 am


  • All of Mr Robinson's blocks better be pancakes because you all have really built him up to the stuff of legend.
    Image
    User avatar
    Tech Worlds
    * Capt'n Dom *
    * Capt'n Dom *
     
    Posts: 9436
    Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:40 am
    Location: Granite Falls, WA


  • Tech Worlds wrote:All of Mr Robinson's blocks better be pancakes because you all have really built him up to the stuff of legend.


    This is exactlywhat I'm thinking. I like MRob too and am really glad he's back, but that's a mighty high bar everyone's setting for him. This isn't exactly Mike Alstott or Jim Taylor we're talking about here. Rob's good but c'mon people...
    Radish, check your PMs. Man upstairs has an invite for a tail gate up in heaven with your name on it.
    User avatar
    CANHawk
    * Gangnameister *
     
    Posts: 11321
    Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2009 3:29 pm
    Location: PoCompton, BC Canada


  • Basis4day wrote:
    BigBallsPete wrote:To clarify, Danny was definitely insinuating that Coleman outperformed Robinson on the field. He wasn't saying the Robinson got sick and Coleman won the job by default.

    This isn't the first time either, over the past few months every time the MRob topic has come up, Danny has made comments to that effect. It's a ludicrous position that I wish Brock would call him on.


    Can we have the quote? I still don't see what is so ridiculous about it (Though you're free to disagree with Danny's opinion). MRob missed preseason games and it's Danny's job to cover the team. He also has access to coaches and personnel that we don't. We never saw what Mike Rob was like in a regular season game, so the best any fan can go off is their own preference.

    I like Mike Rob's play as much as the next fan, but my opinion is entirely based on what i saw last year. Same as most fans.


    I don't feel like going back through the 3 hour podcast yesterday, that's why I asked if any of you caught the show. Please correct me if I didn't hear him right. My point is that Robinson is a proven commodity who has been playing at a high level in real NFL games for years.

    Does anybody here think Coleman is a better football player than Robinson (money and health being equal)?

    Does anyone here seriously question whether there will be a performance dropoff because we now have Mike instead of Coleman? To me, that last question is asenine.
    User avatar
    BigBallsPete
    NET Bench Warmer
     
    Posts: 40
    Joined: Mon Aug 29, 2011 6:06 pm


  • Tech Worlds wrote:All of Mr Robinson's blocks better be pancakes because you all have really built him up to the stuff of legend.


    This isn't about Mike Rob being Chuck Norris. It's about Derrick Coleman being Steve Urkell, for the first six games, at least.

    Everyone that watched Coleman closely agreed that he was hurting the offense by being out there. The coaches obviously agreed, because Coleman's role was being reduced in every successive game, meaning that very important parts of our playbook were going away with him.

    He did play very well in the Cardinals game before his injury, but I thought even at the end of the preseason that Seattle would be nuts to keep Coleman, much less ditch Mike Rob for him. Based on what we've learned this week, they didn't have a choice.

    On that note, Danny O'Neil is a moron for thinking the Coleman swap was in any way based upon on-field performance. He's a nice guy, but his football knowledge is far weaker than Huard's and as a result he has to rely on clichés and talking points way too much.
    User avatar
    kearly
    * Mr Random Thought *
     
    Posts: 10981
    Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2007 1:44 am


Re: Danny O'Neil claims Coleman
Wed Oct 23, 2013 12:29 pm
  • -The Glove- wrote:
    Missing_Clink wrote:What's wrong with saying that Coleman beat out a guy who had lost 40 pounds from an illness and was hospitalized? Can't play fullback from a hospital bed


    To say Coleman "beat out" Robinson infers he outperformed MRob on the field


    Bingo

    Coleman beat out Ware for the FB spot, Mike Rob was pretty much gone after his illness.
    Image
    3elieve
    User avatar
    Throwdown
    * NET Baller *
     
    Posts: 19137
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 8:02 am
    Location: Graham, WA


  • kearly wrote:
    Tech Worlds wrote:All of Mr Robinson's blocks better be pancakes because you all have really built him up to the stuff of legend.


    This isn't about Mike Rob being Chuck Norris. It's about Derrick Coleman being Steve Urkell, for the first six games, at least.

    Everyone that watched Coleman closely agreed that he was hurting the offense by being out there. The coaches obviously agreed, because Coleman's role was being reduced in every successive game, meaning that very important parts of our playbook were going away with him.

    He did play very well in the Cardinals game before his injury, but I thought even at the end of the preseason that Seattle would be nuts to keep Coleman, much less ditch Mike Rob for him. Based on what we've learned this week, they didn't have a choice.

    On that note, Danny O'Neil is a moron for thinking the Coleman swap was in any way based upon on-field performance. He's a nice guy, but his football knowledge is far weaker than Huard's and as a result he has to rely on clichés and talking points way too much.


    Honesty kearly I do not believe that most people on this board watched Coleman closely at all. They are merely parroting what you say.

    Not that you are incorrect in your assessment.

    This guy has quickly became Paul Bunion.
    Image
    User avatar
    Tech Worlds
    * Capt'n Dom *
    * Capt'n Dom *
     
    Posts: 9436
    Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:40 am
    Location: Granite Falls, WA


  • CANHawk wrote:That's right bitch. CANHawk can NOT be defined. He is too amazing to be defined by normal words. You'd need several pictures and at least one instance of improper touching to be able to define CANHawk...

    Adding your own entries into Urban Dictionary makes you a tool. 8)
    Image
    "VICTORYYYYYYY!" -Johnny Drama
    User avatar
    RolandDeschain
    *NET FCC Liaison*
     
    Posts: 25456
    Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 8:39 am
    Location: Kirkland, WA


  • BigBallsPete wrote:
    Basis4day wrote:
    BigBallsPete wrote:To clarify, Danny was definitely insinuating that Coleman outperformed Robinson on the field. He wasn't saying the Robinson got sick and Coleman won the job by default.

    This isn't the first time either, over the past few months every time the MRob topic has come up, Danny has made comments to that effect. It's a ludicrous position that I wish Brock would call him on.


    Can we have the quote? I still don't see what is so ridiculous about it (Though you're free to disagree with Danny's opinion). MRob missed preseason games and it's Danny's job to cover the team. He also has access to coaches and personnel that we don't. We never saw what Mike Rob was like in a regular season game, so the best any fan can go off is their own preference.

    I like Mike Rob's play as much as the next fan, but my opinion is entirely based on what i saw last year. Same as most fans.


    I don't feel like going back through the 3 hour podcast yesterday, that's why I asked if any of you caught the show. Please correct me if I didn't hear him right. My point is that Robinson is a proven commodity who has been playing at a high level in real NFL games for years.

    Does anybody here think Coleman is a better football player than Robinson (money and health being equal)?

    Does anyone here seriously question whether there will be a performance dropoff because we now have Mike instead of Coleman? To me, that last question is asenine.


    And therein lies the rub. It's pretty clear that MRob's health played a major factor in the decision to cut him. Whether or not a healthy MRob beats out Coleman is irrelevant because you're disagreeing with O'Neal based on MRob being healthy all through camp. That isn't what happened.
    Give me some damn skittles...
    User avatar
    Basis4day
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3200
    Joined: Mon Aug 15, 2011 11:57 am


Re: Danny O'Neil claims Coleman
Wed Oct 23, 2013 12:40 pm
  • Tech Worlds wrote:
    kearly wrote:
    Tech Worlds wrote:All of Mr Robinson's blocks better be pancakes because you all have really built him up to the stuff of legend.


    This isn't about Mike Rob being Chuck Norris. It's about Derrick Coleman being Steve Urkell, for the first six games, at least.

    Everyone that watched Coleman closely agreed that he was hurting the offense by being out there. The coaches obviously agreed, because Coleman's role was being reduced in every successive game, meaning that very important parts of our playbook were going away with him.

    He did play very well in the Cardinals game before his injury, but I thought even at the end of the preseason that Seattle would be nuts to keep Coleman, much less ditch Mike Rob for him. Based on what we've learned this week, they didn't have a choice.

    On that note, Danny O'Neil is a moron for thinking the Coleman swap was in any way based upon on-field performance. He's a nice guy, but his football knowledge is far weaker than Huard's and as a result he has to rely on clichés and talking points way too much.


    Honesty kearly I do not believe that most people on this board watched Coleman closely at all. They are merely parroting what you say.

    Not that you are incorrect in your assessment.


    This guy has quickly became Paul Bunion.


    Extremely relevant.
    Give me some damn skittles...
    User avatar
    Basis4day
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3200
    Joined: Mon Aug 15, 2011 11:57 am


  • The Radish wrote:Nice article about it in our newspaper this morning. I'd post it but if you don't subscribe to our paper they charge for access to their files.

    Its from MikeRobs side and he said just what is posted above, he was ill, making more money than any fullback in the league.

    The team had to make a decision, keep him and pay him $2.5 million or cut him and take a chance on younger talent. That experiment didn't work as well as they hoped because it takes a while for a new blocker to "get it" about that position.

    I'd now be interested in what happens next year.

    :les:

    In my paper too and it's free to read here (and yes, it's a very good read):

    http://www.columbian.com/news/2013/oct/ ... -robinson/
    Last edited by hawksfansinceday1 on Wed Oct 23, 2013 12:44 pm, edited 1 time in total.
    From the white sands
    To the canyon lands
    To the redwood stands
    To the barren lands

    Image
    User avatar
    hawksfansinceday1
    NET Pro Bowler
     
    Posts: 11288
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 10:38 am
    Location: Vancouver, WA


  • I wonder if everybody realizes that we are averaging 4.5 yards per carry so far this season? Obviously I would love for it to be even better with MRob, but blaming our offensive struggles on Derrick Coleman is hilariously silly.
    "Check out my 2012 NFL Draft Grades. I just gave the worst grade ever to Seattle." - WalterFootball.com
    User avatar
    AgentDib
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2131
    Joined: Fri Oct 01, 2010 9:08 pm
    Location: Seattle


  • RolandDeschain wrote:
    CANHawk wrote:That's right bitch. CANHawk can NOT be defined. He is too amazing to be defined by normal words. You'd need several pictures and at least one instance of improper touching to be able to define CANHawk...

    Adding your own entries into Urban Dictionary makes you a tool. 8)


    CANHawk didn't add his own entry. Jester did that, but the urban dictionary denied him! Because it is not POSSIBLE to define the CANHawk.
    Radish, check your PMs. Man upstairs has an invite for a tail gate up in heaven with your name on it.
    User avatar
    CANHawk
    * Gangnameister *
     
    Posts: 11321
    Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2009 3:29 pm
    Location: PoCompton, BC Canada


  • AgentDib wrote:I wonder if everybody realizes that we are averaging 4.5 yards per carry so far this season? Obviously I would love for it to be even better with MRob, but blaming our offensive struggles on Derrick Coleman is hilariously silly.

    Did you factor in that Wilson's runs account for a good chunk of that?

    Like several folks here already said, I sincerely hope people's expectations for MRob aren't too sky high, especially for the first couple of games.
    From the white sands
    To the canyon lands
    To the redwood stands
    To the barren lands

    Image
    User avatar
    hawksfansinceday1
    NET Pro Bowler
     
    Posts: 11288
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 10:38 am
    Location: Vancouver, WA


  • AgentDib wrote:I wonder if everybody realizes that we are averaging 4.5 yards per carry so far this season? Obviously I would love for it to be even better with MRob, but blaming our offensive struggles on Derrick Coleman is hilariously silly.


    Yerp. Marshwn is on pace for 1,300 yards this season. That's bang on pace for what he's done the last two full seasons he's played. Giving MRob as much credit for Marshawn's success as some people around here are giving him is an insult to Marshawn.

    And this is coming from a guy who PLAYED fullback! I NEVER think my kind get enough credit, but people are being a bit silly fawning over MRob these days.
    Radish, check your PMs. Man upstairs has an invite for a tail gate up in heaven with your name on it.
    User avatar
    CANHawk
    * Gangnameister *
     
    Posts: 11321
    Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2009 3:29 pm
    Location: PoCompton, BC Canada


Re: Danny O'Neil claims Coleman
Wed Oct 23, 2013 1:01 pm
  • Tech Worlds wrote:
    kearly wrote:
    Tech Worlds wrote:All of Mr Robinson's blocks better be pancakes because you all have really built him up to the stuff of legend.


    This isn't about Mike Rob being Chuck Norris. It's about Derrick Coleman being Steve Urkell, for the first six games, at least.

    Everyone that watched Coleman closely agreed that he was hurting the offense by being out there. The coaches obviously agreed, because Coleman's role was being reduced in every successive game, meaning that very important parts of our playbook were going away with him.

    He did play very well in the Cardinals game before his injury, but I thought even at the end of the preseason that Seattle would be nuts to keep Coleman, much less ditch Mike Rob for him. Based on what we've learned this week, they didn't have a choice.

    On that note, Danny O'Neil is a moron for thinking the Coleman swap was in any way based upon on-field performance. He's a nice guy, but his football knowledge is far weaker than Huard's and as a result he has to rely on clichés and talking points way too much.


    Honesty kearly I do not believe that most people on this board watched Coleman closely at all. They are merely parroting what you say.

    Not that you are incorrect in your assessment.

    This guy has quickly became Paul Bunion.


    Nah, you just cherish being the bit of grit in the oyster on every topic. I'm still waiting for the pearls. Many of us have our own opinions, so you might as well not try to read other peoples' minds. MR was better than Coleman in the preseason and he was much better last season than Coleman has been this season. According to PFF, Coleman's DVOA is -3.1, which is bad. MR's was 3.0 last year.

    MR is an upgrade. He's not a world beater. Crucially, no one said he is.

    So far this season, the optimists are winning in a landslide.
    formido
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 478
    Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2012 12:41 pm
    Location: Ventura, CA


  • formido wrote:
    Tech Worlds wrote:
    kearly wrote:
    Tech Worlds wrote:All of Mr Robinson's blocks better be pancakes because you all have really built him up to the stuff of legend.


    This isn't about Mike Rob being Chuck Norris. It's about Derrick Coleman being Steve Urkell, for the first six games, at least.

    Everyone that watched Coleman closely agreed that he was hurting the offense by being out there. The coaches obviously agreed, because Coleman's role was being reduced in every successive game, meaning that very important parts of our playbook were going away with him.

    He did play very well in the Cardinals game before his injury, but I thought even at the end of the preseason that Seattle would be nuts to keep Coleman, much less ditch Mike Rob for him. Based on what we've learned this week, they didn't have a choice.

    On that note, Danny O'Neil is a moron for thinking the Coleman swap was in any way based upon on-field performance. He's a nice guy, but his football knowledge is far weaker than Huard's and as a result he has to rely on clichés and talking points way too much.


    Honesty kearly I do not believe that most people on this board watched Coleman closely at all. They are merely parroting what you say.

    Not that you are incorrect in your assessment.

    This guy has quickly became Paul Bunion.


    Nah, you just cherish being the bit of grit in the oyster on every topic. I'm still waiting for the pearls. Many of us have our own opinions, so you might as well not try to read other peoples' minds. MR was better than Coleman in the preseason and he was much better last season than Coleman has been this season. According to PFF, Coleman's DVOA is -3.1, which is bad. MR's was 3.0 last year.

    MR is an upgrade. He's not a world beater. Crucially, no one said he is.

    So far this season, the optimists are winning in a landslide.


    You sir are obviously the exception. Congratulations for a job well done.
    Image
    User avatar
    Tech Worlds
    * Capt'n Dom *
    * Capt'n Dom *
     
    Posts: 9436
    Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:40 am
    Location: Granite Falls, WA


  • In fairness to O'Neil, technically Coleman did beat out MRob...which isn't a huge accomplishment as I could have beat out MRob by default of being in the hospital.

    2 things...I'd caution a seamless transition. Not only has MRob been out of the loop in terms of practice, but he's also not going to be the same physically for a few months.

    Last thing, O'Neil is a huge tool. It's sad that Brock has this clown as a side kick on what could be a really top notch radio program. But hey, good for O'Neil.
    Mtjhoyas
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 309
    Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2013 2:03 pm


  • scakfan wrote:
    ivotuk wrote:O'Neill is an ass kisser and I get so tired of his faked laugh that he makes overly loud. He has some occasional good points but then he gets arrogant and says the stupidest isht! He even overrides Brock sometimes which is completely ignorant.

    Danny is very knowledgeable, but he needs to tone it down some with his "volume."

    And to say Coleman outperformed Robinson on the field appears to be an attempt to kiss up to Pete and John, but it's far from reality. Someone as smart as Mr. O'Neill should know that "outperforming" someone, or something means a head to head competition under similar conditions.



    I used to listen to Brock and Salk but with Danny there it is just unbearable. His extended GIRLEY giggle belongs on an Ophra Winfrey show. For someone whom probable never owned a set of cleats he sure is given a lot of leeway in providing his opinion. I think all in all KJR is much more informative and entertaining. Especially SOFTTY!

    :13:
    Danny's laugh is sooooo annoying and his attempts at being funning are awkward/nerdy. Sometimes it seems like Brock is annoyed with Danny and wants to grab him by the neck to choke him out.
    cover-2
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 540
    Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2011 11:47 am


  • CANHawk wrote:
    AgentDib wrote:I wonder if everybody realizes that we are averaging 4.5 yards per carry so far this season? Obviously I would love for it to be even better with MRob, but blaming our offensive struggles on Derrick Coleman is hilariously silly.


    Yerp. Marshwn is on pace for 1,300 yards this season. That's bang on pace for what he's done the last two full seasons he's played. Giving MRob as much credit for Marshawn's success as some people around here are giving him is an insult to Marshawn.

    And this is coming from a guy who PLAYED fullback! I NEVER think my kind get enough credit, but people are being a bit silly fawning over MRob these days.


    This is what happens when you cherry pick stats. How about looking at our rushing average out of....say, I formation ? Or how about comparing every formation with a FB. Take out the rushes from Wilson. You'd have a better idea how Coleman is doing, and it's not good. It affects Lynch; he doesn't trust his blocking, even when it's there. Some teams figured it out and clogged the cut back lanes, which ended up with lower rushing totals.

    What Kearly said was that "very important pieces were being left ouf of the playbook". We were leaving the fullback on the sidelines, running 3 WRs, spreading the defense out, and running Lynch out of single set back. Anyone notice that we haven't been wearing teams out in the 4th quarter with our run game ? I formation has a lot to do with that; you beat up people a hell of a lot more with a FB than spreading the defense out and finding lanes that way. It's a finesse way to run, and people honestly have to admit that Carroll definately doesn't want to be a finesse team.
    Hawks46
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3615
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 5:01 pm


  • Aros wrote:You simply cannot put a price on having Lynch's trust. Thank God MRob is back!


    Trust. Something he hasn't had this season wrt fullbacks.
    "We walked our (pedestrian) ass to the Super Bowl"
    Angry Doug
    "We're looking for grit"
    Pete Carroll
    "We got grit. That's it."
    Earl Thomas.
    User avatar
    Rocket
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1231
    Joined: Sat Jun 30, 2012 11:12 pm
    Location: The Rain Forest


  • Tech Worlds wrote:
    kearly wrote:
    Tech Worlds wrote:All of Mr Robinson's blocks better be pancakes because you all have really built him up to the stuff of legend.


    This isn't about Mike Rob being Chuck Norris. It's about Derrick Coleman being Steve Urkell, for the first six games, at least.

    Everyone that watched Coleman closely agreed that he was hurting the offense by being out there. The coaches obviously agreed, because Coleman's role was being reduced in every successive game, meaning that very important parts of our playbook were going away with him.

    He did play very well in the Cardinals game before his injury, but I thought even at the end of the preseason that Seattle would be nuts to keep Coleman, much less ditch Mike Rob for him. Based on what we've learned this week, they didn't have a choice.

    On that note, Danny O'Neil is a moron for thinking the Coleman swap was in any way based upon on-field performance. He's a nice guy, but his football knowledge is far weaker than Huard's and as a result he has to rely on clichés and talking points way too much.


    Honesty kearly I do not believe that most people on this board watched Coleman closely at all. They are merely parroting what you say.

    Not that you are incorrect in your assessment.

    This guy has quickly became Paul Bunion.


    I have my own set of eyes and a brain (some would argue otherwise) and I've seen too many times where Coleman would merely just get in the way of a pass rusher. As fast and athletic as these guys are, they can recover and attack RW and Lynch in a split second.
    User avatar
    -The Glove-
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 7034
    Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2011 12:12 am


  • TwilightError wrote:He just makes provocative comments as part of his profession. MikeRob is an ox!


    Part of the radio business...nay...all of the radio biz is entertainment. It looks like Danny boy is learning lessons from Skip Bayless. If you're an old or overweight white guy, pretend as though you're down with the kids, then take insane positions in order to excite the viewers either in anger or agreement. It's a proven recipe for success, as you've seen with Mr Skip who has been in the biz for generations and still has a career. I don't fault them particularly. It's what they do to survive. Can you imagine Danny boy playing the hip hop angle if he was on TV, lol? No way. A 45 year old 250 lb white guy regurgitating hip hop lines? What about grandpa skip, how does a 75 year old have a show on ESPN?

    It's obvious to any and all that Mrob was "beat out" due to the fact that he was owed 2.5 mil. The Hawks made a financial decision. And I agree with the decision. But the guy was not beat out by Coleman at any time for football reasons.
    User avatar
    plyka
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1323
    Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2010 7:40 pm


  • Rocket wrote:
    Aros wrote:You simply cannot put a price on having Lynch's trust. Thank God MRob is back!


    Trust. Something he hasn't had this season wrt fullbacks.


    Correct me if I'm wrong never heard anyone discuss whether or not Lynch "trusts" his FB until Kearly said it in his Random Thoughts.
    Kind of goes along with Tech World's point if that's where people picked it up.

    That being said, it doesn't affect whether it's true or not.
    Give me some damn skittles...
    User avatar
    Basis4day
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3200
    Joined: Mon Aug 15, 2011 11:57 am


Next


It is currently Mon Sep 22, 2014 2:38 pm

Please REGISTER to become a member

Return to [ THE OFFICIAL NET NATION FAN FORUM ]




Information