May 11, 2009

Defending Bobby Engram's Honor

Overrated Favre Fanboy Peter King has come out with his "Power Rankings," and here's what he had to say about the Seahawks:

19. Seattle
Hard not to like what the Seahawks have done in the offseason, replacing the declining Julian Peterson and Rocky Bernard with Aaron Curry at linebacker and defensive-line-rotation pieces Colin Cole and Cory Redding. T.J. Houshmandzadeh's a very good addition, but he's not really much different than Bobby Engram, other than he should be able to stay healthier than Engram. But this team will sink or swim on the back of Matt Hasselbeck. Jim Mora told me in about 16 different ways that Hasselbeck's back is fine. Hasselbeck has echoed that repeatedly, but let's see how he holds up when the real games start.

It sure sounds like he's slagging on Bobby Engram, doesn't it? What King obviously doesn't remember is 2007, when Engram was healthy and Hasselbeck's primary target. How'd he do that year?

94 catches for 1147 yards and 6 TDs.

I don't know about you guys, but if Housh puts up those numbers this fall, I'll be VERY happy (though I expect a few more TDs from T.J.).

Take a break from texting Mr. Wrangler Jeans and check your stats, King.



Jordan said...

I have no idea how you could possibly take that as an insult. That is a compliment to Bobby to be compared to one of the league's top WR's over the last five years. The only negative thing he said was that Bobby couldn't stay healthy...which is absolutely true. I love your stuff usually, but this is a bit absurd. King clearly likes both receivers.

DKSB said...

Yeah, you're probably right.

However, I don't think King has earned the benefit of the doubt when it comes to possessing voluminous knowledge about the Seahawks.

I guess I was going on the assumption that A) King, like most national writers, wouldn't really have accurate knowledge about how good Engram has been in Seattle and thus, B) Comparing Housh to Engram would be, in the minds of the ill-informed, an insult or at best a back-handed compliment.

If Peter King actually has a positive accurate mental picture of Engram's years in Seattle, then yes, you're right... It's a compliment.

DKSB said...

Also, I'm just inclined to ASSUME national writers are bound to take a negative perspective on all things Seahawks.. I'm willing to admit I might be wrong in this case.

Misfit said...

Here is some merit to King showing his ignorance and idiocy:

via KSK (and I quote from here:

19. Seattle
T.J. Houshmandzadeh’s a very good addition, but he’s not really much different than Bobby Engram…

Houshmandzadeh the past three years:
2006 90-1,081 9 TD’s
2007 112-1,143 12 TD’s
2008 92-904 4 TD’s
AVG 98-1,042 8TD’s

Engram the past three years:
2006 24-290 1 TD
2007 94-1,147 6 TD’s
2008 47-489 0 TD’s
AVG 55-642 2 TD’s

…other than he should be able to stay healthier than Engram.

Wouldn’t that make him WILDLY FUCKING DIFFERENT from Engram? “Hey, here’s a guy who plays well every game. But he’s really not that different from this other guy, who’s much older and is often too injured to actually play. Otherwise, MIRROR IMAGES.”

DKSB said...

As usual, KSK has shown us the way.

That's WAY better than the drivel I squeezed out... That's why they're internet superstars and I'm just a crank with a wi-fi connection :-]

gonzhawk said...

No, your correct in not trusting a national pundit when it comes to our beloved seahawks-

he is okay sometimes, but mostly and assclown others...

He had to write something when he got to our rankings, right?

He might as well have said we are idiots for paying 40 mil for a wideout we could have for 1/4 that....