Quote:Wait.  So, if these players all return from injury, that's a good thing and it could help the team win.  But, pointing out that they've missed playing time due to injury and that this can impact the success/failure of this team is called an excuse? 

Look man, Im done with insulting you and being rude, so Im going to make this post as friendly as possible.

 

First, injuries cannot be used as an excuse, ESPECIALLY if that injury is not to your franchise QB. Can it effect the succeess/ failure of this team? Absolutely. Does that mean you can you use it as an excuse? Absolutely not. The colts beat us without their starting franchise QB, see how they responded to this whole injury thing? They've won three straight, two of them sans Luck.

 

Our injuries were to a MLB that took a paycut, a TE that we hadn't seen since week one of the preseason, and a WR that we CONSTANTLY have to deal with being banged up (thats unproven anyway)and Sen'Derrick Marks . Marks is literally the only player actually that could fit your argument, but we knew he would be out for a WHILE now, since the last game of last season.

 

Secondly. Should you NEED to be 100% healthy to beat the Bucs? Our team was said to be "built" at the beginning of the season, good depth is part of being a "built" team. Was missing Paul Poz and Marks the SOLE reason for giving up 123 rushing yards to Doug Martin? Or making a mistake prone QB only miss on 6 of his passes? Was missing Linder the SOLE reason that our RB couldnt gain more than 32 yards against the 25th worst rush D in the league? Or for our offense to be 2/8 in 3rd down efficiency? Should we be happy that this " built " team was getting beat 24-38 against a team that was then considered THE WORST IN THE LEAGUE, making us rely on exploiting TBs prevent defense, and forcing us to go for an onside kick to make the loss even sound respectable? 38-31 sounds nice, except when you realize that the score was actually 24-38 until about 3 minutes left in the game.

 

That's all I got.

---