Started By
Message
re: Best RB in the SEC after week 7
Posted on 10/13/13 at 2:32 pm to CockRocket
Posted on 10/13/13 at 2:32 pm to CockRocket
Well obviously you don't do hypothetical very well
2
Posted on 10/13/13 at 2:34 pm to LSUNV
quote:Sure, but the fact remains that he did miss time due to being a frick-up. It's the same reason Gurley can't make the list, he just isn't playing enough.
So, give Hill his first two games and the stats change drastically
Posted on 10/13/13 at 2:34 pm to TigersOfGeauxld
quote:
I would love to see Hill and Davis play in a meaningful game against each other, to decide this question head to head.
Hopefully the rest of the SEC will accommodate this event into happening. It would certainly be more interesting than any other scenario, me thinks...
Posted on 10/13/13 at 2:34 pm to ConwayGamecock
quote:
Davis is averaging more per gm than Hill.
You realize Hill was held out of half a game, right?
Posted on 10/13/13 at 2:34 pm to LSUNV
quote:
Well obviously you don't do hypothetical very well
Only way LSU fans win arguments
This post was edited on 10/13/13 at 2:35 pm
Posted on 10/13/13 at 2:35 pm to CNB
You frickers are vastly becoming the Arkies of the east.
You can't take an opinion in stride anymore. I can't wait for the O bC retires and y'all become irrelevant again
You can't take an opinion in stride anymore. I can't wait for the O bC retires and y'all become irrelevant again
This post was edited on 10/13/13 at 2:37 pm
Posted on 10/13/13 at 2:36 pm to LSUNV
quote:Sometimes I can't tell because of all the delusional LSU posters there are here. It would seem that you are not one of those posters.
Well obviously you don't do hypothetical very well
Posted on 10/13/13 at 2:36 pm to LSUNV
Because we believe Davis is the best back and have the stats to prove it?
Get out of here with that shite
Get out of here with that shite
Posted on 10/13/13 at 2:37 pm to CNB
You have become one of the worst on here lately.
Posted on 10/13/13 at 2:37 pm to CNB
quote:
Because we believe Davis is the best back and have the stats to prove it?
Stats dont prove that at all, in fact they dont prove one way or the other.
Posted on 10/13/13 at 2:38 pm to CNB
Exactly. If Davis stats weren't better than Hill's we would be pulling an Arky, but they're not. So Davis is the best and the west is just doubling down Arky style.
Posted on 10/13/13 at 2:39 pm to LSUNV
I give zero fricks what your opinion is of me. If you have to use a hypothetical to back up your argument, you don't have a very good argument.
Posted on 10/13/13 at 2:39 pm to Tigerbait8
Remember the Gumps wouldn't agree that Hill > Yeldon? lol
Posted on 10/13/13 at 2:39 pm to LSUNV
quote:
You frickers are vastly becoming the Arkies of the east.
Odd adverb to use
Posted on 10/13/13 at 2:40 pm to CNB
I give zero fricks that you give zero fricks. Your stats are flawed so DWI fricktard
Posted on 10/13/13 at 2:41 pm to LSUNV
quote:
Most of this is irrelevant since hill missed most of the first two games
How is this irrelevant? Missing games meaning what? That therefore Davis has about 10 more carries than Hill has? That has any relevancy? Davis hasn't missed entire games because unlike Hill he doesn't get into trouble within his program, but he has been taken out of games for substantial portions of times this season.
How can an argument for a RB being the best in the SEC be based on how much said RB is a non-factor due to him not being used in games? Shouldn't that be a basis on how said RB is NOT the best?? Because he's not on the field of play, he's standing on the sideline in his civvies?
Posted on 10/13/13 at 2:41 pm to LSUNV
How are the stats flawed? Because you can't twist them to make Hill look better than Davis? 
Posted on 10/13/13 at 2:42 pm to CNB
If I have to explain basic mathematical principles to you then you are already behind the 8 ball
Posted on 10/13/13 at 2:42 pm to ConwayGamecock
quote:
How is this irrelevant? Missing games meaning what? That therefore Davis has about 10 more carries than Hill has? That has any relevancy? Davis hasn't missed entire games because unlike Hill he doesn't get into trouble within his program, but he has been taken out of games for substantial portions of times this season.
How can an argument for a RB being the best in the SEC be based on how much said RB is a non-factor due to him not being used in games? Shouldn't that be a basis on how said RB is NOT the best?? Because he's not on the field of play, he's standing on the sideline in his civvies?
Posted on 10/13/13 at 2:43 pm to LSUNV
Riding the bench shouldn't be included in your "basic mathematical principles"
Page 2 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News