Originally posted by darkknight49:
i think your math is a bit off, excluding the 21 defensive pts from the Rams game and the 7 pts from ST in Minn. All pts are from offensive scoring only.
Hill: 5.5 games
20 + 23 + 24 + 35 + 10 + 0 - 21 defensive pts - 7 ST pts = 84 pts
84/5.5 = 15.27 pts/game
Smith: 6.5 Games
21 + 14 + 27 + 10 + 24 + 20 + 17 = 133 pts
133/6.5 = 20.46 pts/game
Smith has not had the luxury of defensive and ST points. Those aspects of a team help make it complete. As we can see, this team is better offensively, but its not a complete team yet.
Freakin OWNED!!!
Joe your hatred toward Smith, especially in light of his OBVIOUS improvement game by game, is going to keep you chastized and your opinion disregarded even more then it already is if you keep it up. It's like Kriz and his Vernon hate, nobody listens to a word he says on the subject any longer unless they are looking for an argument.
YOU ARE WRONG. OUR OFFENSE IS BETTER WITH SMITH THAN IT WAS WITH HILL. Get over it dude before you blow what little cerdibility you have left.
[ Edited by WINiner on Dec 12, 2009 at 08:09:15 ]
