Search found 62 matches
- Wed Sep 13, 2017 4:50 pm
- Forum: Football Talk
- Topic: 1945 Bill Paschal
- Replies: 2
- Views: 6818
Re: 1945 Bill Paschal
Nice digging! Many thanks for the information!
- Mon Sep 11, 2017 5:22 pm
- Forum: Football Talk
- Topic: 2017 NFL Season Discussion
- Replies: 60
- Views: 97345
Re: 2017 NFL Season Discussion
Wow, no love for Dallas on this thread! They are better than last season, especially on defense, and will take the East with 11-12 wins as long as they have Zeke in the backfield. I would have expected the Giants to be #2 in the East but they look terrible on offense (even if OBJ comes back they sti...
- Sun Sep 10, 2017 7:55 pm
- Forum: Football Talk
- Topic: 1945 Bill Paschal
- Replies: 2
- Views: 6818
1945 Bill Paschal
Hello all,
In 1945, Bill Paschal played in 4 games, starting 1, for the New York Giants. I know he played against the Rams in week 7 and the Packers in Week 10. Can anyone ID the other two games in which he played? It's rather odd because he led the team in rushing attempts that season....
In 1945, Bill Paschal played in 4 games, starting 1, for the New York Giants. I know he played against the Rams in week 7 and the Packers in Week 10. Can anyone ID the other two games in which he played? It's rather odd because he led the team in rushing attempts that season....
- Mon Aug 14, 2017 5:23 pm
- Forum: Football Talk
- Topic: '80 Eagles lose by "less than 25" to win East in finale
- Replies: 7
- Views: 12588
Re: '80 Eagles lose by "less than 25" to win East in finale
I remember watching that game and being incredibly excited watching the Cowboys build that huge lead and covering the 25 point difference needed to take the division. But the Eagles came back and, as I recall, Dallas really couldn't stop them at the end. After that, it was "oh well, on to the W...
- Wed Jun 28, 2017 5:33 pm
- Forum: Football Talk
- Topic: Mid '80's Cowboys
- Replies: 17
- Views: 31131
Re: Mid '80's Cowboys
What do you make of the mid '80's Cowboys? It is a bit of an interesting period where they really weren't Super Bowl contenders anylonger but still an above average team that tended to start off seasons strong but then struggle to the finish line. Was it a matter of a still talented team that was j...
- Wed Jun 28, 2017 5:14 pm
- Forum: Football Talk
- Topic: New PFRA Book: AAFC Encyclopedia
- Replies: 2
- Views: 7301
Re: New PFRA Book: AAFC Encyclopedia
Ken, did you include defensive lineups for each team in each season? I'm wondering at the amount of detail included (there have been a couple of very general encyclopedias covering the AAFC; I have most, if not all, of them!). Game recaps in detail or just box scores? Long Gains for RBs and WRs?
- Mon Apr 17, 2017 4:20 pm
- Forum: Football Talk
- Topic: Romo Retires
- Replies: 30
- Views: 49835
Re: Romo Retires
I do think he should make HoVG. He had a very solid career overall IMHO.sluggermatt15 wrote:Romo a HoF candidate? No, I do not believe so. Not close to one of the best QBs to ever play. A HOVG candidate? A greater possibility exists there, but I do not know for certain. Depends on who he is up against.
- Wed Apr 05, 2017 2:12 pm
- Forum: Football Talk
- Topic: Romo Retires
- Replies: 30
- Views: 49835
Re: Romo Retires
Romo has a good tv personality so it is not surprising that the networks would be vying for him. As far as how Romo compares to past Cowboy qb's like White and Meredith that is a very interesting question. Obviously White and Meredith had a lot more success but at the same time they had about twice...
- Fri Mar 24, 2017 1:35 pm
- Forum: Football Talk
- Topic: Sacks as part of rushing average
- Replies: 11
- Views: 22243
Re: Sacks as part of rushing average
Okay, thanks Bob!
- Thu Mar 23, 2017 8:31 pm
- Forum: Football Talk
- Topic: Sacks as part of rushing average
- Replies: 11
- Views: 22243
Sacks as part of rushing average
I need to verify: the NFL counted sacks against a QB's rushing yardage/stats in 1945 and both the NFL and AAFC counted them against the QB's rushing yardage/stats in 1946. In 1947, they went back to being a separate category (tackles for loss), correct?