PDA

View Full Version : Jackson has 'wanted change' but not now



Marrdro
05-05-2010, 09:50 AM
Jackson has 'wanted change' but not now (http://www.startribune.com/sports/vikings/blogs/92814349.html)
Marrdro's comments follow:
I missed the first part of it, but caught the tail end as well as some of the comments by the announcers afterward.

I have said it before, and will probably say it again, I still say that TJ has shown nothing but profesionalism throughout his short career when it comes to things like this.

I for one, can't wait to see him on the field this year, showing us that he has infact, improved over the offseason, just as he has every year especially, the "Little Things"..... ;)

gagarr
05-05-2010, 10:02 AM
Marrdro wrote:

Jackson has 'wanted change' but not now (http://www.startribune.com/sports/vikings/blogs/92814349.html)
Marrdro's comments follow:
I missed the first part of it, but caught the tail end as well as some of the comments by the announcers afterward.

I have said it before, and will probably say it again, I still say that TJ has shown nothing but profesionalism throughout his short career when it comes to things like this.

I for one, can't wait to see him on the field this year, showing us that he has infact, improved over the offseason, just as he has every year especially, the "Little Things"..... ;)

Marrdro, you're not fooling any of us. You don't give crap about seeing TJ on the field THIS YEAR. You just want Favre OFF the field.

Marrdro
05-05-2010, 10:05 AM
gagarr wrote:

Marrdro wrote:

Jackson has 'wanted change' but not now (http://www.startribune.com/sports/vikings/blogs/92814349.html)
Marrdro's comments follow:
I missed the first part of it, but caught the tail end as well as some of the comments by the announcers afterward.

I have said it before, and will probably say it again, I still say that TJ has shown nothing but profesionalism throughout his short career when it comes to things like this.

I for one, can't wait to see him on the field this year, showing us that he has infact, improved over the offseason, just as he has every year especially, the "Little Things"..... ;)

Marrdro, you're not fooling any of us. You don't give crap about seeing TJ on the field THIS YEAR. You just want Favre OFF the field.
LOL, I'm not quite that complex my friend. If the Noodle shows up, he shows up. I will just focus on the OL play.

If TJ, on the other hand, is the QB, I will be watching him like a hawk..... ;)

Prophet
05-05-2010, 10:08 AM
..."One thing I learned from Brett is just be yourself regardless of the situation and the circumstances," he said. "Just go out and be yourself today, every day and they [can] take it or leave it. Thatís what Iím going to do and thatís how Iím approaching it. Just trying to get better every day like I always did, working hard. Thatís all I can do and thatís how Iím going to take it.Ē

Jackson was candid in admitting that possibly being the starter isn't the same as knowing you are the team's choice: "Itís different when you know youíre the guy or when you kind of think youíll be a backup. You can say youíre going to work as hard, but itís a lot different when you know youíre going to be the guy and youíve got those guys depending on you."

Jackson, who is 10-10 as a starter...

Jackson has had a good attitude based on what I've read about him, that's a good thing. Still doesn't change that this is his 5th year and the next time he takes the reigns the typical NFL pressure will be on him and the pressure of proving that he can handle the job.

He obviously got some advice from Favre, but, the second paragraph is disturbing. Does he have the competitive drive? He has been gifted the starting spot during his tenure with the Vikings at the end of '06, in '07, and in '08 and admits in his own words, "Itís different when you know youíre the guy or when you kind of think youíll be a backup. You can say youíre going to work as hard, but itís a lot different when you know youíre going to be the guy and youíve got those guys depending on you."

It doesn't matter. If you are the starter you give it your all and if you are the backup you give it your all because you could come in on a moment's notice if there is an injury and you should be trying to win the starting role. You don't give less effort because the starting role wasn't gifted to you, you fight harder and EARN the position. That direct quote right there gives me even less confidence in him ever becoming a bonified starter. Fight.

Marrdro
05-05-2010, 10:17 AM
Prophet wrote:


..."One thing I learned from Brett is just be yourself regardless of the situation and the circumstances," he said. "Just go out and be yourself today, every day and they [can] take it or leave it. Thatís what Iím going to do and thatís how Iím approaching it. Just trying to get better every day like I always did, working hard. Thatís all I can do and thatís how Iím going to take it.Ē

Jackson was candid in admitting that possibly being the starter isn't the same as knowing you are the team's choice: "Itís different when you know youíre the guy or when you kind of think youíll be a backup. You can say youíre going to work as hard, but itís a lot different when you know youíre going to be the guy and youíve got those guys depending on you."

Jackson, who is 10-10 as a starter...

Jackson has had a good attitude based on what I've read about him, that's a good thing. Still doesn't change that this is his 5th year and the next time he takes the reigns the typical NFL pressure will be on him and the pressure of proving that he can handle the job.

He obviously got some advice from Favre, but, the second paragraph is disturbing. Does he have the competitive drive? He has been gifted the starting spot during his tenure with the Vikings at the end of '06, in '07, and in '08 and admits in his own words, "Itís different when you know youíre the guy or when you kind of think youíll be a backup. You can say youíre going to work as hard, but itís a lot different when you know youíre going to be the guy and youíve got those guys depending on you."

It doesn't matter. If you are the starter you give it your all and if you are the backup you give it your all because you could come in on a moment's notice if there is an injury and you should be trying to win the starting role. You don't give less effort because the starting role wasn't gifted to you, you fight harder and EARN the position. That direct quote right there gives me even less confidence in him ever becoming a bonified starter. Fight.
Wasn't there a quote along those lines last year were he said something about working hard, that got everyone all in a tizzy.

Then some of the other players basically said "No one works harder than TJ"?

jargomcfargo
05-05-2010, 10:26 AM
Prophet wrote:


..."One thing I learned from Brett is just be yourself regardless of the situation and the circumstances," he said. "Just go out and be yourself today, every day and they [can] take it or leave it. Thatís what Iím going to do and thatís how Iím approaching it. Just trying to get better every day like I always did, working hard. Thatís all I can do and thatís how Iím going to take it.Ē

Jackson was candid in admitting that possibly being the starter isn't the same as knowing you are the team's choice: "Itís different when you know youíre the guy or when you kind of think youíll be a backup. You can say youíre going to work as hard, but itís a lot different when you know youíre going to be the guy and youíve got those guys depending on you."

Jackson, who is 10-10 as a starter...

Jackson has had a good attitude based on what I've read about him, that's a good thing. Still doesn't change that this is his 5th year and the next time he takes the reigns the typical NFL pressure will be on him and the pressure of proving that he can handle the job.

He obviously got some advice from Favre, but, the second paragraph is disturbing. Does he have the competitive drive? He has been gifted the starting spot during his tenure with the Vikings at the end of '06, in '07, and in '08 and admits in his own words, "Itís different when you know youíre the guy or when you kind of think youíll be a backup. You can say youíre going to work as hard, but itís a lot different when you know youíre going to be the guy and youíve got those guys depending on you."

It doesn't matter. If you are the starter you give it your all and if you are the backup you give it your all because you could come in on a moment's notice if there is an injury and you should be trying to win the starting role. You don't give less effort because the starting role wasn't gifted to you, you fight harder and EARN the position. That direct quote right there gives me even less confidence in him ever becoming a bonified starter. Fight.

Disturbing and telling, I agree.

Marrdro
05-05-2010, 12:43 PM
"I can say it was fine," Jackson said. "When he first came in he pulled me to the side. We were walking to practice one day and he was like, ĎI donít know what youíve heard, but if I can help you with anything just let me know.í I honestly told him, ĎWell, if I can learn anything it will be more by watching than asking questions. Iíd [learn] by me seeing you do certain things and how you do it. If I can see it, I can do it.í [There was] little stuff with the offense that he helped me with as far as the offense goes but I pretty much know the offense. Itís just about going on the field and making it happen.


Jackson: Relationship with Favre was fine (http://www.startribune.com/sports/vikings/blogs/92869214.html)

Prophet
05-05-2010, 12:50 PM
Marrdro wrote:


"I can say it was fine," Jackson said. "When he first came in he pulled me to the side. We were walking to practice one day and he was like, ĎI donít know what youíve heard, but if I can help you with anything just let me know.í I honestly told him, ĎWell, if I can learn anything it will be more by watching than asking questions. Iíd [learn] by me seeing you do certain things and how you do it. If I can see it, I can do it.í [There was] little stuff with the offense that he helped me with as far as the offense goes but I pretty much know the offense. Itís just about going on the field and making it happen.


Jackson: Relationship with Favre was fine (http://www.startribune.com/sports/vikings/blogs/92869214.html)

Um, yeah, just what any fan or coach or comatose person has been saying about your development Tarvaris. Can't say that I'm impressed that he knows the playbook after four years of getting paid millions to learn it. Execute it. Be a leader. tick, tick, tick, tick, tick...

i_bleed_purple
05-05-2010, 01:08 PM
"Even the things that we really didn't have in the offense, things that he kind of got guys to feed into and kind of keep the chains moving a lot," Jackson said, referencing Favre's ability to operate on the fly. "Just little things that he did that kept our offense going. As much as Iíve learned from him, a lot of stuff he did because heís Brett Favre.

Shocking.

I could have sworn that Marrdro guy was telling me that Favre didn't 'run' the offense at all, but our team carried him.... funny, I must have mis-heard

Marrdro
05-05-2010, 01:12 PM
i_bleed_purple wrote:


"Even the things that we really didn't have in the offense, things that he kind of got guys to feed into and kind of keep the chains moving a lot," Jackson said, referencing Favre's ability to operate on the fly. "Just little things that he did that kept our offense going. As much as Iíve learned from him, a lot of stuff he did because heís Brett Favre.

Shocking.

I could have sworn that Marrdro guy was telling me that Favre didn't 'run' the offense at all, but our team carried him.... funny, I must have mis-heard
LOL, I said there is no way a QB can come up with a Gameplan. Never once did I say the Noodle doesn't free lance.

Hell, it was one of his biggest issues I dislike about the guy.

Prophet
05-05-2010, 01:13 PM
i_bleed_purple wrote:


"Even the things that we really didn't have in the offense, things that he kind of got guys to feed into and kind of keep the chains moving a lot," Jackson said, referencing Favre's ability to operate on the fly. "Just little things that he did that kept our offense going. As much as Iíve learned from him, a lot of stuff he did because heís Brett Favre.

Shocking.

I could have sworn that Marrdro guy was telling me that Favre didn't 'run' the offense at all, but our team carried him.... funny, I must have mis-heard

The best part about never having met marrdro is that I cannot hear his voice reading his posts to me. I can choose any voice I want. Right now I'm using Esmeralda's voice from Bewitched.

i_bleed_purple
05-05-2010, 01:20 PM
Marrdro wrote:

i_bleed_purple wrote:


"Even the things that we really didn't have in the offense, things that he kind of got guys to feed into and kind of keep the chains moving a lot," Jackson said, referencing Favre's ability to operate on the fly. "Just little things that he did that kept our offense going. As much as Iíve learned from him, a lot of stuff he did because heís Brett Favre.

Shocking.

I could have sworn that Marrdro guy was telling me that Favre didn't 'run' the offense at all, but our team carried him.... funny, I must have mis-heard
LOL, I said there is no way a QB can come up with a Gameplan. Never once did I say the Noodle doesn't free lance.

Hell, it was one of his biggest issues I dislike about the guy.

I'd love to have you show me a quote of somebody claiming he gameplans. People say he runs the offense, and you stretch it into them saying he sits down with Chilly and determinse the percentages of plays they want to run, and what situation to do what.

Fact is, he does run the offense. Chilly calls the plays, but he runs it effectively, allows for all plays to be called, instead of limiting the QB, and he can run a hurry up or no-huddle. He can audiable, and take advantage of mismatches he sees.

That's what I call running the offense.

Marrdro
05-05-2010, 01:23 PM
i_bleed_purple wrote:

Marrdro wrote:

i_bleed_purple wrote:


"Even the things that we really didn't have in the offense, things that he kind of got guys to feed into and kind of keep the chains moving a lot," Jackson said, referencing Favre's ability to operate on the fly. "Just little things that he did that kept our offense going. As much as Iíve learned from him, a lot of stuff he did because heís Brett Favre.

Shocking.

I could have sworn that Marrdro guy was telling me that Favre didn't 'run' the offense at all, but our team carried him.... funny, I must have mis-heard
LOL, I said there is no way a QB can come up with a Gameplan. Never once did I say the Noodle doesn't free lance.

Hell, it was one of his biggest issues I dislike about the guy.

I'd love to have you show me a quote of somebody claiming he gameplans. People say he runs the offense, and you stretch it into them saying he sits down with Chilly and determinse the percentages of plays they want to run, and what situation to do what.

Fact is, he does run the offense. Chilly calls the plays, but he runs it effectively, allows for all plays to be called, instead of limiting the QB, and he can run a hurry up or no-huddle. He can audiable, and take advantage of mismatches he sees.

That's what I call running the offense.
I call it executing the game plan. ;)

C Mac D
05-05-2010, 01:24 PM
Marrdro wrote:


"I can say it was fine," Jackson said. "When he first came in he pulled me to the side. We were walking to practice one day and he was like, ĎI donít know what youíve heard, but if I can help you with anything just let me know.í I honestly told him, ĎWell, if I can learn anything it will be more by watching than asking questions. Iíd [learn] by me seeing you do certain things and how you do it. If I can see it, I can do it.í [There was] little stuff with the offense that he helped me with as far as the offense goes but I pretty much know the offense. Itís just about going on the field and making it happen.


Jackson: Relationship with Favre was fine (http://www.startribune.com/sports/vikings/blogs/92869214.html)

Wow... imagine that... a QB to sit and LEARN BEHIND that isn't named Gus Frerrote, Brooks Bollinger, Kelly Holcomb or Brad Johnson.

What a groundbreaking thought... (yet, it probably is to many people on these boards)

Marrdro
05-05-2010, 01:25 PM
Prophet wrote:

i_bleed_purple wrote:


"Even the things that we really didn't have in the offense, things that he kind of got guys to feed into and kind of keep the chains moving a lot," Jackson said, referencing Favre's ability to operate on the fly. "Just little things that he did that kept our offense going. As much as Iíve learned from him, a lot of stuff he did because heís Brett Favre.

Shocking.

I could have sworn that Marrdro guy was telling me that Favre didn't 'run' the offense at all, but our team carried him.... funny, I must have mis-heard

The best part about never having met marrdro is that I cannot hear his voice reading his posts to me. I can choose any voice I want. Right now I'm using Esmeralda's voice from Bewitched.
LOL. First a Hobbit, now a Witch. Man I love PPO.

On a side note, I wonder what local MN fare Hobbits and Witches eat? :dry:

Marrdro
05-05-2010, 01:27 PM
C Mac D wrote:

Marrdro wrote:


"I can say it was fine," Jackson said. "When he first came in he pulled me to the side. We were walking to practice one day and he was like, ĎI donít know what youíve heard, but if I can help you with anything just let me know.í I honestly told him, ĎWell, if I can learn anything it will be more by watching than asking questions. Iíd [learn] by me seeing you do certain things and how you do it. If I can see it, I can do it.í [There was] little stuff with the offense that he helped me with as far as the offense goes but I pretty much know the offense. Itís just about going on the field and making it happen.


Jackson: Relationship with Favre was fine (http://www.startribune.com/sports/vikings/blogs/92869214.html)

Wow... imagine that... a QB to sit and LEARN BEHIND that isn't named Gus Frerrote, Brooks Bollinger, Kelly Holcomb or Brad Johnson.

What a groundbreaking thought... (yet, it probably is to many people on these boards)
I wonder why some of you haven't posted a few of the other little nuggets in there?

I found atleast 3 more that shoot alot of what has been said on here by a few Anti TJ people all to shit. ;)

tarkenton10
05-05-2010, 01:30 PM
Marrdro wrote:

i_bleed_purple wrote:

Marrdro wrote:

i_bleed_purple wrote:


"Even the things that we really didn't have in the offense, things that he kind of got guys to feed into and kind of keep the chains moving a lot," Jackson said, referencing Favre's ability to operate on the fly. "Just little things that he did that kept our offense going. As much as Iíve learned from him, a lot of stuff he did because heís Brett Favre.

Shocking.

I could have sworn that Marrdro guy was telling me that Favre didn't 'run' the offense at all, but our team carried him.... funny, I must have mis-heard
LOL, I said there is no way a QB can come up with a Gameplan. Never once did I say the Noodle doesn't free lance.

Hell, it was one of his biggest issues I dislike about the guy.

I'd love to have you show me a quote of somebody claiming he gameplans. People say he runs the offense, and you stretch it into them saying he sits down with Chilly and determinse the percentages of plays they want to run, and what situation to do what.

Fact is, he does run the offense. Chilly calls the plays, but he runs it effectively, allows for all plays to be called, instead of limiting the QB, and he can run a hurry up or no-huddle. He can audiable, and take advantage of mismatches he sees.

That's what I call running the offense.
I call it executing the game plan. ;)

Potato, potato (Potauto)! It's the same thing using different verbage. The game plan is called, if he uses an audible then he is running the offense. He determines the play at the LOS not the coach. Therefore he is running the O or executing the O same difference.

Marrdro
05-05-2010, 01:43 PM
tarkenton10 wrote:

Marrdro wrote:

i_bleed_purple wrote:

Marrdro wrote:

i_bleed_purple wrote:


"Even the things that we really didn't have in the offense, things that he kind of got guys to feed into and kind of keep the chains moving a lot," Jackson said, referencing Favre's ability to operate on the fly. "Just little things that he did that kept our offense going. As much as Iíve learned from him, a lot of stuff he did because heís Brett Favre.

Shocking.

I could have sworn that Marrdro guy was telling me that Favre didn't 'run' the offense at all, but our team carried him.... funny, I must have mis-heard
LOL, I said there is no way a QB can come up with a Gameplan. Never once did I say the Noodle doesn't free lance.

Hell, it was one of his biggest issues I dislike about the guy.

I'd love to have you show me a quote of somebody claiming he gameplans. People say he runs the offense, and you stretch it into them saying he sits down with Chilly and determinse the percentages of plays they want to run, and what situation to do what.

Fact is, he does run the offense. Chilly calls the plays, but he runs it effectively, allows for all plays to be called, instead of limiting the QB, and he can run a hurry up or no-huddle. He can audiable, and take advantage of mismatches he sees.

That's what I call running the offense.
I call it executing the game plan. ;)

Potato, potato (Potauto)! It's the same thing using different verbage. The game plan is called, if he uses an audible then he is running the offense. He determines the play at the LOS not the coach. Therefore he is running the O or executing the O same difference.
But it is the coaches who study the tape to determine the tendancies of teams, which gives the ole Noodle the bankground to recognize and then audible out of a play based on that look.

marstc09
05-05-2010, 01:45 PM
Marrdro wrote:


"I can say it was fine," Jackson said. "When he first came in he pulled me to the side. We were walking to practice one day and he was like, ĎI donít know what youíve heard, but if I can help you with anything just let me know.í I honestly told him, ĎWell, if I can learn anything it will be more by watching than asking questions. Iíd [learn] by me seeing you do certain things and how you do it. If I can see it, I can do it.í [There was] little stuff with the offense that he helped me with as far as the offense goes but I pretty much know the offense. Itís just about going on the field and making it happen.


Jackson: Relationship with Favre was fine (http://www.startribune.com/sports/vikings/blogs/92869214.html)

Sounds a little too cocky to mean. His ass better perform after hearing this crap. I remember there being another comment that he said that pissed me off. I can't find it now. Ask questions you dumb ass.

Marrdro
05-05-2010, 01:46 PM
marstc09 wrote:

Marrdro wrote:


"I can say it was fine," Jackson said. "When he first came in he pulled me to the side. We were walking to practice one day and he was like, ĎI donít know what youíve heard, but if I can help you with anything just let me know.í I honestly told him, ĎWell, if I can learn anything it will be more by watching than asking questions. Iíd [learn] by me seeing you do certain things and how you do it. If I can see it, I can do it.í [There was] little stuff with the offense that he helped me with as far as the offense goes but I pretty much know the offense. Itís just about going on the field and making it happen.


Jackson: Relationship with Favre was fine (http://www.startribune.com/sports/vikings/blogs/92869214.html)

Sounds a little too cocky to mean. His ass better perform after hearing this crap. I remember there being another comment that he said that pissed me off. I can't find it now. Ask questions you dumb ass.
I like a bit of tude out of our players. The game is no place for whimps, thats for sure.

C Mac D
05-05-2010, 01:49 PM
marstc09 wrote:

Marrdro wrote:


"I can say it was fine," Jackson said. "When he first came in he pulled me to the side. We were walking to practice one day and he was like, ĎI donít know what youíve heard, but if I can help you with anything just let me know.í I honestly told him, ĎWell, if I can learn anything it will be more by watching than asking questions. Iíd [learn] by me seeing you do certain things and how you do it. If I can see it, I can do it.í [There was] little stuff with the offense that he helped me with as far as the offense goes but I pretty much know the offense. Itís just about going on the field and making it happen.


Jackson: Relationship with Favre was fine (http://www.startribune.com/sports/vikings/blogs/92869214.html)

Sounds a little too cocky to mean. His ass better perform after hearing this crap. I remember there being another comment that he said that pissed me off. I can't find it now. Ask questions you dumb ass.

I didn't take it that way... IMO, when it comes to football, it's easier to learn something by watching it rather than break it down by talking about it. It's why teams watch video week-in and week-out.

Also, people learn differently. Some people are visual learners, some are auditory learners. Jackson is probably more of a visual learner... and by looking at the list of QBs he's had to watch over the past 4 years, it's no wonder some of you think he's developed so poorly.

marstc09
05-05-2010, 01:58 PM
C Mac D wrote:

marstc09 wrote:

Marrdro wrote:


"I can say it was fine," Jackson said. "When he first came in he pulled me to the side. We were walking to practice one day and he was like, ĎI donít know what youíve heard, but if I can help you with anything just let me know.í I honestly told him, ĎWell, if I can learn anything it will be more by watching than asking questions. Iíd [learn] by me seeing you do certain things and how you do it. If I can see it, I can do it.í [There was] little stuff with the offense that he helped me with as far as the offense goes but I pretty much know the offense. Itís just about going on the field and making it happen.


Jackson: Relationship with Favre was fine (http://www.startribune.com/sports/vikings/blogs/92869214.html)

Sounds a little too cocky to mean. His ass better perform after hearing this crap. I remember there being another comment that he said that pissed me off. I can't find it now. Ask questions you dumb ass.

I didn't take it that way... IMO, when it comes to football, it's easier to learn something by watching it rather than break it down by talking about it. It's why teams watch video week-in and week-out.

Also, people learn differently. Some people are visual learners, some are auditory learners. Jackson is probably more of a visual learner... and by looking at the list of QBs he's had to watch over the past 4 years, it's no wonder some of you think he's developed so poorly.

QBs also go over plays and discuss on the sidelines during the games. Someone made a comment that TJ is sometimes nowhere to be found.

Good point on the QBs that TJ has had to watch. That was a lot of the reason I wanted Favre to come in but others continued to fight me on it.

Marrdro
05-05-2010, 02:00 PM
marstc09 wrote:

C Mac D wrote:

marstc09 wrote:

Marrdro wrote:


"I can say it was fine," Jackson said. "When he first came in he pulled me to the side. We were walking to practice one day and he was like, ĎI donít know what youíve heard, but if I can help you with anything just let me know.í I honestly told him, ĎWell, if I can learn anything it will be more by watching than asking questions. Iíd [learn] by me seeing you do certain things and how you do it. If I can see it, I can do it.í [There was] little stuff with the offense that he helped me with as far as the offense goes but I pretty much know the offense. Itís just about going on the field and making it happen.


Jackson: Relationship with Favre was fine (http://www.startribune.com/sports/vikings/blogs/92869214.html)

Sounds a little too cocky to mean. His ass better perform after hearing this crap. I remember there being another comment that he said that pissed me off. I can't find it now. Ask questions you dumb ass.

I didn't take it that way... IMO, when it comes to football, it's easier to learn something by watching it rather than break it down by talking about it. It's why teams watch video week-in and week-out.

Also, people learn differently. Some people are visual learners, some are auditory learners. Jackson is probably more of a visual learner... and by looking at the list of QBs he's had to watch over the past 4 years, it's no wonder some of you think he's developed so poorly.

QBs also go over plays and discuss on the sidelines during the games. Someone made a comment that TJ is sometimes nowhere to be found.

Good point on the QBs that TJ has had to watch. That was a lot of the reason I wanted Favre to come in but others continued to fight me on it.
LOL, that isn't the reason you wanted him here. ;)

C Mac D
05-05-2010, 02:03 PM
marstc09 wrote:

C Mac D wrote:

marstc09 wrote:

Marrdro wrote:


"I can say it was fine," Jackson said. "When he first came in he pulled me to the side. We were walking to practice one day and he was like, ĎI donít know what youíve heard, but if I can help you with anything just let me know.í I honestly told him, ĎWell, if I can learn anything it will be more by watching than asking questions. Iíd [learn] by me seeing you do certain things and how you do it. If I can see it, I can do it.í [There was] little stuff with the offense that he helped me with as far as the offense goes but I pretty much know the offense. Itís just about going on the field and making it happen.


Jackson: Relationship with Favre was fine (http://www.startribune.com/sports/vikings/blogs/92869214.html)

Sounds a little too cocky to mean. His ass better perform after hearing this crap. I remember there being another comment that he said that pissed me off. I can't find it now. Ask questions you dumb ass.

I didn't take it that way... IMO, when it comes to football, it's easier to learn something by watching it rather than break it down by talking about it. It's why teams watch video week-in and week-out.

Also, people learn differently. Some people are visual learners, some are auditory learners. Jackson is probably more of a visual learner... and by looking at the list of QBs he's had to watch over the past 4 years, it's no wonder some of you think he's developed so poorly.

QBs also go over plays and discuss on the sidelines during the games. Someone made a comment that TJ is sometimes nowhere to be found.

Good point on the QBs that TJ has had to watch. That was a lot of the reason I wanted Favre to come in but others continued to fight me on it.

Always loved those comments because every week I'd see Jackson standing next to Favre going over plays... and every week someone said he was "Nowhere to be found..."

You find out who was actually watching the game.

Favre was a great pickup. I'm not advocating Jackson should start behind him... I"m just happy he finally has a legit QB to develop behind.

And I mean actually develop, not Childress throwing him into the spotlight prematurely and telling the media he's ready. I honestly don't know if Childress can recognize QB talent... unless it's one of the best QBs of all-time. If Jackson turns into something special, I'll give full credit to Chilly.

seaniemck7
05-05-2010, 02:06 PM
Marrdro wrote:

Prophet wrote:

i_bleed_purple wrote:


"Even the things that we really didn't have in the offense, things that he kind of got guys to feed into and kind of keep the chains moving a lot," Jackson said, referencing Favre's ability to operate on the fly. "Just little things that he did that kept our offense going. As much as Iíve learned from him, a lot of stuff he did because heís Brett Favre.

Shocking.

I could have sworn that Marrdro guy was telling me that Favre didn't 'run' the offense at all, but our team carried him.... funny, I must have mis-heard

The best part about never having met marrdro is that I cannot hear his voice reading his posts to me. I can choose any voice I want. Right now I'm using Esmeralda's voice from Bewitched.
LOL. First a Hobbit, now a Witch. Man I love PPO.

On a side note, I wonder what local MN fare Hobbits and Witches eat? :dry:

Naw the best part is actually having the pleasure to meet Marrdro and being able to read his post with his amalgam of Minnesotan and SE Virginian dialect come through :) true entertainment.

As far as TJ goes, I think he has a tendency to be a little too honest with the media. You cannot tell me that any player in his situation would not feel a little bit like what TJ was describing. In his opinion, mostly derived by what Caine always brings up: Chilly's advocacy of TJ's readiness, he was being groomed to be the starting QB. When Farve came in, he had ZERO chance to start.

I understand your logic in working hard no matter your role. But a young, starting QB who gets trumped by a veteral with no shot at starting has to get his confidence/ego/comfort level shaken. Jason Campbell was in the same position this year with McNabb comingin. I also think they both handled the situation quite well.

marstc09
05-05-2010, 02:10 PM
i_bleed_purple wrote:


"Even the things that we really didn't have in the offense, things that he kind of got guys to feed into and kind of keep the chains moving a lot," Jackson said, referencing Favre's ability to operate on the fly. "Just little things that he did that kept our offense going. As much as Iíve learned from him, a lot of stuff he did because heís Brett Favre.

Shocking.

I could have sworn that Marrdro guy was telling me that Favre didn't 'run' the offense at all, but our team carried him.... funny, I must have mis-heard

Who would of thunk?

Marrdro
05-05-2010, 02:11 PM
seaniemck7 wrote:


Naw the best part is actually having the pleasure to meet Marrdro and being able to read his post with his amalgam of Minnesotan and SE Virginian dialect come through :) true entertainment.

So am I a local from MN or a local from VA?

LOL, JK, Them boys old enough for a fishing trip this summer? ;)

marstc09
05-05-2010, 02:12 PM
C Mac D wrote:

marstc09 wrote:

C Mac D wrote:

marstc09 wrote:

Marrdro wrote:


"I can say it was fine," Jackson said. "When he first came in he pulled me to the side. We were walking to practice one day and he was like, ĎI donít know what youíve heard, but if I can help you with anything just let me know.í I honestly told him, ĎWell, if I can learn anything it will be more by watching than asking questions. Iíd [learn] by me seeing you do certain things and how you do it. If I can see it, I can do it.í [There was] little stuff with the offense that he helped me with as far as the offense goes but I pretty much know the offense. Itís just about going on the field and making it happen.


Jackson: Relationship with Favre was fine (http://www.startribune.com/sports/vikings/blogs/92869214.html)

Sounds a little too cocky to mean. His ass better perform after hearing this crap. I remember there being another comment that he said that pissed me off. I can't find it now. Ask questions you dumb ass.

I didn't take it that way... IMO, when it comes to football, it's easier to learn something by watching it rather than break it down by talking about it. It's why teams watch video week-in and week-out.

Also, people learn differently. Some people are visual learners, some are auditory learners. Jackson is probably more of a visual learner... and by looking at the list of QBs he's had to watch over the past 4 years, it's no wonder some of you think he's developed so poorly.

QBs also go over plays and discuss on the sidelines during the games. Someone made a comment that TJ is sometimes nowhere to be found.

Good point on the QBs that TJ has had to watch. That was a lot of the reason I wanted Favre to come in but others continued to fight me on it.

Always loved those comments because every week I'd see Jackson standing next to Favre going over plays... and every week someone said he was "Nowhere to be found..."

You find out who was actually watching the game.

Favre was a great pickup. I'm not advocating Jackson should start behind him... I"m just happy he finally has a legit QB to develop behind.

And I mean actually develop, not Childress throwing him into the spotlight prematurely and telling the media he's ready. I honestly don't know if Childress can recognize QB talent... unless it's one of the best QBs of all-time. If Jackson turns into something special, I'll give full credit to Chilly.

I could have sworn you were the one who said they don't get to watch every game. Anyways there are times were TJ is nowhere to be found but I am not holding that against him. I blame Childress.

Marrdro
05-05-2010, 02:14 PM
marstc09 wrote:

C Mac D wrote:

marstc09 wrote:

C Mac D wrote:

marstc09 wrote:

Marrdro wrote:


"I can say it was fine," Jackson said. "When he first came in he pulled me to the side. We were walking to practice one day and he was like, ĎI donít know what youíve heard, but if I can help you with anything just let me know.í I honestly told him, ĎWell, if I can learn anything it will be more by watching than asking questions. Iíd [learn] by me seeing you do certain things and how you do it. If I can see it, I can do it.í [There was] little stuff with the offense that he helped me with as far as the offense goes but I pretty much know the offense. Itís just about going on the field and making it happen.


Jackson: Relationship with Favre was fine (http://www.startribune.com/sports/vikings/blogs/92869214.html)

Sounds a little too cocky to mean. His ass better perform after hearing this crap. I remember there being another comment that he said that pissed me off. I can't find it now. Ask questions you dumb ass.

I didn't take it that way... IMO, when it comes to football, it's easier to learn something by watching it rather than break it down by talking about it. It's why teams watch video week-in and week-out.

Also, people learn differently. Some people are visual learners, some are auditory learners. Jackson is probably more of a visual learner... and by looking at the list of QBs he's had to watch over the past 4 years, it's no wonder some of you think he's developed so poorly.

QBs also go over plays and discuss on the sidelines during the games. Someone made a comment that TJ is sometimes nowhere to be found.

Good point on the QBs that TJ has had to watch. That was a lot of the reason I wanted Favre to come in but others continued to fight me on it.

Always loved those comments because every week I'd see Jackson standing next to Favre going over plays... and every week someone said he was "Nowhere to be found..."

You find out who was actually watching the game.

Favre was a great pickup. I'm not advocating Jackson should start behind him... I"m just happy he finally has a legit QB to develop behind.

And I mean actually develop, not Childress throwing him into the spotlight prematurely and telling the media he's ready. I honestly don't know if Childress can recognize QB talent... unless it's one of the best QBs of all-time. If Jackson turns into something special, I'll give full credit to Chilly.

I could have sworn you were the one who said they don't get to watch every game. Anyways there are times were TJ is nowhere to be found but I am not holding that against him. I blame Childress.
I blame Sage. That dude is all over the Noodles tip so bad ole TJ doesn't have room to get in to see the pics.

tarkenton10
05-05-2010, 03:10 PM
He still looks at it and determines the best play against the D he sees. Also he probably knows more about how to gameplan at this stage than the Chiller. Just because he is the coach does not make him more knowledgeable, just responsible! If I had to choose between Favre and Chiller on Xs and Os I would take Favre every time. I have seen some of Chillers game plans and it aint pretty.

tarkenton10
05-05-2010, 03:30 PM
C Mac D wrote:

marstc09 wrote:

Marrdro wrote:


"I can say it was fine," Jackson said. "When he first came in he pulled me to the side. We were walking to practice one day and he was like, ĎI donít know what youíve heard, but if I can help you with anything just let me know.í I honestly told him, ĎWell, if I can learn anything it will be more by watching than asking questions. Iíd [learn] by me seeing you do certain things and how you do it. If I can see it, I can do it.í [There was] little stuff with the offense that he helped me with as far as the offense goes but I pretty much know the offense. Itís just about going on the field and making it happen.


Jackson: Relationship with Favre was fine (http://www.startribune.com/sports/vikings/blogs/92869214.html)

Sounds a little too cocky to mean. His ass better perform after hearing this crap. I remember there being another comment that he said that pissed me off. I can't find it now. Ask questions you dumb ass.

I didn't take it that way... IMO, when it comes to football, it's easier to learn something by watching it rather than break it down by talking about it. It's why teams watch video week-in and week-out.

Also, people learn differently. Some people are visual learners, some are auditory learners. Jackson is probably more of a visual learner... and by looking at the list of QBs he's had to watch over the past 4 years, it's no wonder some of you think he's developed so poorly.

Everyone else's fault except the person who has to perform. Now he had poor examples. I really am at the point where I hope he starts next year just so the TJ sniffers get their wish. And while I hope he does well posts like this give me that little twing if he performs well. He has no one to blame for his performance good or bad other than himself. I am sure if he does great those no name QBs will not get any credit for his ascention Only those names are brought out to relieve him of any responsibitly for any BAD plays, the good ones he did all by his little ol' self. AMAZING!!! :blink:

C Mac D
05-05-2010, 03:37 PM
marstc09 wrote:

C Mac D wrote:

marstc09 wrote:

C Mac D wrote:

marstc09 wrote:

Marrdro wrote:


"I can say it was fine," Jackson said. "When he first came in he pulled me to the side. We were walking to practice one day and he was like, ĎI donít know what youíve heard, but if I can help you with anything just let me know.í I honestly told him, ĎWell, if I can learn anything it will be more by watching than asking questions. Iíd [learn] by me seeing you do certain things and how you do it. If I can see it, I can do it.í [There was] little stuff with the offense that he helped me with as far as the offense goes but I pretty much know the offense. Itís just about going on the field and making it happen.


Jackson: Relationship with Favre was fine (http://www.startribune.com/sports/vikings/blogs/92869214.html)

Sounds a little too cocky to mean. His ass better perform after hearing this crap. I remember there being another comment that he said that pissed me off. I can't find it now. Ask questions you dumb ass.

I didn't take it that way... IMO, when it comes to football, it's easier to learn something by watching it rather than break it down by talking about it. It's why teams watch video week-in and week-out.

Also, people learn differently. Some people are visual learners, some are auditory learners. Jackson is probably more of a visual learner... and by looking at the list of QBs he's had to watch over the past 4 years, it's no wonder some of you think he's developed so poorly.

QBs also go over plays and discuss on the sidelines during the games. Someone made a comment that TJ is sometimes nowhere to be found.

Good point on the QBs that TJ has had to watch. That was a lot of the reason I wanted Favre to come in but others continued to fight me on it.

Always loved those comments because every week I'd see Jackson standing next to Favre going over plays... and every week someone said he was "Nowhere to be found..."

You find out who was actually watching the game.

Favre was a great pickup. I'm not advocating Jackson should start behind him... I"m just happy he finally has a legit QB to develop behind.

And I mean actually develop, not Childress throwing him into the spotlight prematurely and telling the media he's ready. I honestly don't know if Childress can recognize QB talent... unless it's one of the best QBs of all-time. If Jackson turns into something special, I'll give full credit to Chilly.

I could have sworn you were the one who said they don't get to watch every game. Anyways there are times were TJ is nowhere to be found but I am not holding that against him. I blame Childress.

I only missed two games all last season, Baltimore and Pittsburgh.

C Mac D
05-05-2010, 03:40 PM
tarkenton10 wrote:

C Mac D wrote:

marstc09 wrote:

Marrdro wrote:


"I can say it was fine," Jackson said. "When he first came in he pulled me to the side. We were walking to practice one day and he was like, ĎI donít know what youíve heard, but if I can help you with anything just let me know.í I honestly told him, ĎWell, if I can learn anything it will be more by watching than asking questions. Iíd [learn] by me seeing you do certain things and how you do it. If I can see it, I can do it.í [There was] little stuff with the offense that he helped me with as far as the offense goes but I pretty much know the offense. Itís just about going on the field and making it happen.


Jackson: Relationship with Favre was fine (http://www.startribune.com/sports/vikings/blogs/92869214.html)

Sounds a little too cocky to mean. His ass better perform after hearing this crap. I remember there being another comment that he said that pissed me off. I can't find it now. Ask questions you dumb ass.

I didn't take it that way... IMO, when it comes to football, it's easier to learn something by watching it rather than break it down by talking about it. It's why teams watch video week-in and week-out.

Also, people learn differently. Some people are visual learners, some are auditory learners. Jackson is probably more of a visual learner... and by looking at the list of QBs he's had to watch over the past 4 years, it's no wonder some of you think he's developed so poorly.

Everyone else's fault except the person who has to perform. Now he had poor examples. I really am at the point where I hope he starts next year just so the TJ sniffers get their wish. And while I hope he does well posts like this give me that little twing if he performs well. He has no one to blame for his performance good or bad other than himself. I am sure if he does great those no name QBs will not get any credit for his ascention Only those names are brought out to relieve him of any responsibitly for any BAD plays, the good ones he did all by his little ol' self. AMAZING!!! :blink:

lol... read whatever you want, but you also wrote-off his tats when they were good (a 95 QB rating his 3rd year and a 110+ QB rating last year... even after you say it takes 2 years to groom a QB. You contradict yourself). Seems someone just wants to hate on Jackson no matter what. Honestly, it comes off as borderline racist.

Tad7
05-05-2010, 06:58 PM
Nice to see C Mac D has this thread covered.

idahovikefan7
05-05-2010, 07:49 PM
Why is it that everyone says we are not a SuperBowl contender if Favre doesn't come back?

Because they know it will be TJ at the helm....

Makes sense to me.

Purple Floyd
05-05-2010, 08:16 PM
Of course he wanted change which is why he didn't sign the tender until the last minute. The problem for him is that no other team thought enough of him to match the tender so the only option he had was to take what the Vikings offered him.

Being in the 5th year of a 3 year project there really is no more time for development and in a way I would like to see Brett stay in Mississippi so we can get Jackson in there and see if he sinks or swims.

Caine
05-05-2010, 08:41 PM
C Mac D wrote:

tarkenton10 wrote:

C Mac D wrote:

marstc09 wrote:

Marrdro wrote:


"I can say it was fine," Jackson said. "When he first came in he pulled me to the side. We were walking to practice one day and he was like, ĎI donít know what youíve heard, but if I can help you with anything just let me know.í I honestly told him, ĎWell, if I can learn anything it will be more by watching than asking questions. Iíd [learn] by me seeing you do certain things and how you do it. If I can see it, I can do it.í [There was] little stuff with the offense that he helped me with as far as the offense goes but I pretty much know the offense. Itís just about going on the field and making it happen.


Jackson: Relationship with Favre was fine (http://www.startribune.com/sports/vikings/blogs/92869214.html)

Sounds a little too cocky to mean. His ass better perform after hearing this crap. I remember there being another comment that he said that pissed me off. I can't find it now. Ask questions you dumb ass.

I didn't take it that way... IMO, when it comes to football, it's easier to learn something by watching it rather than break it down by talking about it. It's why teams watch video week-in and week-out.

Also, people learn differently. Some people are visual learners, some are auditory learners. Jackson is probably more of a visual learner... and by looking at the list of QBs he's had to watch over the past 4 years, it's no wonder some of you think he's developed so poorly.

Everyone else's fault except the person who has to perform. Now he had poor examples. I really am at the point where I hope he starts next year just so the TJ sniffers get their wish. And while I hope he does well posts like this give me that little twing if he performs well. He has no one to blame for his performance good or bad other than himself. I am sure if he does great those no name QBs will not get any credit for his ascention Only those names are brought out to relieve him of any responsibitly for any BAD plays, the good ones he did all by his little ol' self. AMAZING!!! :blink:

lol... read whatever you want, but you also wrote-off his tats when they were good (a 95 QB rating his 3rd year and a 110+ QB rating last year... even after you say it takes 2 years to groom a QB. You contradict yourself). Seems someone just wants to hate on Jackson no matter what. Honestly, it comes off as borderline racist.

Now people are RACIST for not likeing Jackson? OMFG!!!! There is no depth to which you will not plunge, is there! NO one said ANYTHING aout race...ever!! Except...hmmm...you.

Jakson's 95 ratingin 08 was based LARGELY upon the efforts of others. Go back and watch the games again, or go through teh play-by-plays. In virtually EVERY win, either Peterson, Taylor, or the Defense first obliterated t opponent. That allowed Jackson to stat-pad. In games where the above 3 struggled, Jackson disppeared.

Jackson ratings during mop up duty in 09 were an "impressiv" 110...and why not? He had ZERO pressure. The games were never in doubt, the opposing team had all but given up,and Jackson was sent in to wind down the clock. By all means, THOSE are the conditions under which I want to judge my starter under. Hell, why not try and convince us based upon how well he performed when you played Madden?

Jackson has all the PHYSICAL tools to succeed...but he's never demonstrated the mental ability nor the heart to pull one out of the fire (with ONE exception).

THAT is why I don't like Jackson as a starter...and THAT is why most people share that opinion.

Caine

Overlord
05-05-2010, 08:46 PM
Purple Floyd wrote:

Of course he wanted change which is why he didn't sign the tender until the last minute. The problem for him is that no other team thought enough of him to match the tender so the only option he had was to take what the Vikings offered him.

I think Tarvaris' tender was attached to a 3rd round pick. Based on his performance it's no surprise teams weren't interested in that exchange.

I'm curious as to what will happen when he is a true free agent. Assuming he doesn't start this year, then I can't imagine any team pursuing him as a starter. Minnesota will likely remain his best bet to play considering the time the team has already invested in him.

The desire to move on when things aren't exactly as you'd like is not unnatural. But I wonder if he will realize the advantages of staying with the Vikings when he actually has a choice in the matter, or if his pride will force him to try his luck someplace else? Does he truly believe what he's saying now, or is he just being politically correct?


Being in the 5th year of a 3 year project there really is no more time for development and in a way I would like to see Brett stay in Mississippi so we can get Jackson in there and see if he sinks or swims.
I can understand that feeling, but I don't agree with it.

The disadvantages of making a mediocre to average quarterback wait another year pale in comparison to the advantages of trying to get another season like last year out of Favre.

One year in the NFL is a long, long time.

vikinggreg
05-05-2010, 09:33 PM
C Mac D wrote:

tarkenton10 wrote:

C Mac D wrote:

marstc09 wrote:

Marrdro wrote:


"I can say it was fine," Jackson said. "When he first came in he pulled me to the side. We were walking to practice one day and he was like, ĎI donít know what youíve heard, but if I can help you with anything just let me know.í I honestly told him, ĎWell, if I can learn anything it will be more by watching than asking questions. Iíd [learn] by me seeing you do certain things and how you do it. If I can see it, I can do it.í [There was] little stuff with the offense that he helped me with as far as the offense goes but I pretty much know the offense. Itís just about going on the field and making it happen.


Jackson: Relationship with Favre was fine (http://www.startribune.com/sports/vikings/blogs/92869214.html)

Sounds a little too cocky to mean. His ass better perform after hearing this crap. I remember there being another comment that he said that pissed me off. I can't find it now. Ask questions you dumb ass.

I didn't take it that way... IMO, when it comes to football, it's easier to learn something by watching it rather than break it down by talking about it. It's why teams watch video week-in and week-out.

Also, people learn differently. Some people are visual learners, some are auditory learners. Jackson is probably more of a visual learner... and by looking at the list of QBs he's had to watch over the past 4 years, it's no wonder some of you think he's developed so poorly.

Everyone else's fault except the person who has to perform. Now he had poor examples. I really am at the point where I hope he starts next year just so the TJ sniffers get their wish. And while I hope he does well posts like this give me that little twing if he performs well. He has no one to blame for his performance good or bad other than himself. I am sure if he does great those no name QBs will not get any credit for his ascention Only those names are brought out to relieve him of any responsibitly for any BAD plays, the good ones he did all by his little ol' self. AMAZING!!! :blink:

lol... read whatever you want, but you also wrote-off his tats when they were good (a 95 QB rating his 3rd year and a 110+ QB rating last year... even after you say it takes 2 years to groom a QB. You contradict yourself). Seems someone just wants to hate on Jackson no matter what. Honestly, it comes off as borderline racist.

http://i699.photobucket.com/albums/vv352/sirjamesthegood/DoubleFacePalm.jpg

Marrdro
05-06-2010, 08:30 AM
Caine wrote:

Jackson has all the PHYSICAL tools to succeed...but he's never demonstrated the mental ability nor the heart to pull one out of the fire (with ONE exception).

Caine
But therein lies the rub doens't it.

Look around the league. The young QB's that have succeeded have had teams around them that could carry them and no one has asked them to carry anything.

Again, for me atleast, your cut on this is that you expect something out of him, mostly tied to a few comments from our HC saying he was ready. A couple of us don't quite see it that way.

Could we be cutting him some slack? Possibly, but again, shouldn't we cut young kids, forced to play before they are ready, some slack?

tarkenton10
05-06-2010, 08:41 AM
C Mac D wrote:

tarkenton10 wrote:

C Mac D wrote:

marstc09 wrote:

Marrdro wrote:


"I can say it was fine," Jackson said. "When he first came in he pulled me to the side. We were walking to practice one day and he was like, ĎI donít know what youíve heard, but if I can help you with anything just let me know.í I honestly told him, ĎWell, if I can learn anything it will be more by watching than asking questions. Iíd [learn] by me seeing you do certain things and how you do it. If I can see it, I can do it.í [There was] little stuff with the offense that he helped me with as far as the offense goes but I pretty much know the offense. Itís just about going on the field and making it happen.


Jackson: Relationship with Favre was fine (http://www.startribune.com/sports/vikings/blogs/92869214.html)

Sounds a little too cocky to mean. His ass better perform after hearing this crap. I remember there being another comment that he said that pissed me off. I can't find it now. Ask questions you dumb ass.

I didn't take it that way... IMO, when it comes to football, it's easier to learn something by watching it rather than break it down by talking about it. It's why teams watch video week-in and week-out.

Also, people learn differently. Some people are visual learners, some are auditory learners. Jackson is probably more of a visual learner... and by looking at the list of QBs he's had to watch over the past 4 years, it's no wonder some of you think he's developed so poorly.

Everyone else's fault except the person who has to perform. Now he had poor examples. I really am at the point where I hope he starts next year just so the TJ sniffers get their wish. And while I hope he does well posts like this give me that little twing if he performs well. He has no one to blame for his performance good or bad other than himself. I am sure if he does great those no name QBs will not get any credit for his ascention Only those names are brought out to relieve him of any responsibitly for any BAD plays, the good ones he did all by his little ol' self. AMAZING!!! :blink:

lol... read whatever you want, but you also wrote-off his tats when they were good (a 95 QB rating his 3rd year and a 110+ QB rating last year... even after you say it takes 2 years to groom a QB. You contradict yourself). Seems someone just wants to hate on Jackson no matter what. Honestly, it comes off as borderline racist.

You are truly a moron and don't call me a racist you bag of shit you know nothing about me. I have not contradicted myself. His third year he played ok I never said anything else other than it didn't impress me you asshole! And I also said he didn't impress the coaches or he would be starting. The 110 thing is bullshit and you know it. He did mop up duty and played in so few plays I said the data didn't prove anything. Then I said if a second string QB came in a threw a hail mary pass he in the only play he played that year he would have a 140 QB rating. Does that show progress- I got no response. So don't say I am a racist because you are the racist if you think every time someone does not go along with your view they are racist you are putting race into this conversation not me. So don't say that again you dicklicker! See I can use gerogatory remarks too, just stay to the facts!!

Caine
05-06-2010, 09:22 AM
Marrdro wrote:

Caine wrote:

Jackson has all the PHYSICAL tools to succeed...but he's never demonstrated the mental ability nor the heart to pull one out of the fire (with ONE exception).

Caine
But therein lies the rub doens't it.

Look around the league. The young QB's that have succeeded have had teams around them that could carry them and no one has asked them to carry anything.

Again, for me atleast, your cut on this is that you expect something out of him, mostly tied to a few comments from our HC saying he was ready. A couple of us don't quite see it that way.

Could we be cutting him some slack? Possibly, but again, shouldn't we cut young kids, forced to play before they are ready, some slack?

C'mon, Marr...isn't that a bit of a stretch too? Why do you make it so easy?

Are you trying to tell me that Flacco had a good team around him? He plays in BALTIMORE...where Receivers go to DIE. Now, have they made a concerted effort to improve at that position? This year they did...but Flacco was battling his ass off with not much around him before now.

Sanchez at the Jets isn't surrounded by awesome receivers. Schaub in Houston doesn't have much pro-bowl talent around him. And so on, and so on...

Jackson had a bad receiver corps in 06, a better one in 07, and an even better one in 08. And while the TEAM itself improved - along with Jacksons stats - Jackson himself never really seemed to much. Mostly, he rode other people's success.

Caine

C Mac D
05-06-2010, 09:50 AM
tarkenton10 wrote:

C Mac D wrote:

tarkenton10 wrote:

C Mac D wrote:

marstc09 wrote:

Marrdro wrote:


"I can say it was fine," Jackson said. "When he first came in he pulled me to the side. We were walking to practice one day and he was like, ĎI donít know what youíve heard, but if I can help you with anything just let me know.í I honestly told him, ĎWell, if I can learn anything it will be more by watching than asking questions. Iíd [learn] by me seeing you do certain things and how you do it. If I can see it, I can do it.í [There was] little stuff with the offense that he helped me with as far as the offense goes but I pretty much know the offense. Itís just about going on the field and making it happen.


Jackson: Relationship with Favre was fine (http://www.startribune.com/sports/vikings/blogs/92869214.html)

Sounds a little too cocky to mean. His ass better perform after hearing this crap. I remember there being another comment that he said that pissed me off. I can't find it now. Ask questions you dumb ass.

I didn't take it that way... IMO, when it comes to football, it's easier to learn something by watching it rather than break it down by talking about it. It's why teams watch video week-in and week-out.

Also, people learn differently. Some people are visual learners, some are auditory learners. Jackson is probably more of a visual learner... and by looking at the list of QBs he's had to watch over the past 4 years, it's no wonder some of you think he's developed so poorly.

Everyone else's fault except the person who has to perform. Now he had poor examples. I really am at the point where I hope he starts next year just so the TJ sniffers get their wish. And while I hope he does well posts like this give me that little twing if he performs well. He has no one to blame for his performance good or bad other than himself. I am sure if he does great those no name QBs will not get any credit for his ascention Only those names are brought out to relieve him of any responsibitly for any BAD plays, the good ones he did all by his little ol' self. AMAZING!!! :blink:

lol... read whatever you want, but you also wrote-off his tats when they were good (a 95 QB rating his 3rd year and a 110+ QB rating last year... even after you say it takes 2 years to groom a QB. You contradict yourself). Seems someone just wants to hate on Jackson no matter what. Honestly, it comes off as borderline racist.

You are truly a moron and don't call me a racist you bag of shit you know nothing about me. I have not contradicted myself. His third year he played ok I never said anything else other than it didn't impress me you asshole! And I also said he didn't impress the coaches or he would be starting. The 110 thing is bullshit and you know it. He did mop up duty and played in so few plays I said the data didn't prove anything. Then I said if a second string QB came in a threw a hail mary pass he in the only play he played that year he would have a 140 QB rating. Does that show progress- I got no response. So don't say I am a racist because you are the racist if you think every time someone does not go along with your view they are racist you are putting race into this conversation not me. So don't say that again you dicklicker! See I can use gerogatory remarks too, just stay to the facts!!

Realize it doesn't mean much now, but I thought I was replying to Caine at the time.

jargomcfargo
05-06-2010, 10:01 AM
Now it gets even worse for Jackson. He has to follow Favre.
Rogers did it fairly well. But not many young guys could.

If TJ is the replacement for Brett, he has a tough road ahead.

I've been pretty supportive of TJ in the past but the glaring disparity between his performance and Favre's cast a lot doubt in my mind.

And yes,I belive the team was close to the same the last 2 years with a few exceptions.

It appeared Favre made the team better but the team made TJ better.

I do think TJ has improved and hopefully his time in the league will pay dividends.

But as Prophet so eloquently states, TJ is still a question mark.

Is he the future franchise QB?

Is he circling the drain?

His next opportunity will give us the answer, providing he gets one.

Marrdro
05-06-2010, 10:05 AM
Caine wrote:

Marrdro wrote:

Caine wrote:

Jackson has all the PHYSICAL tools to succeed...but he's never demonstrated the mental ability nor the heart to pull one out of the fire (with ONE exception).

Caine
But therein lies the rub doens't it.

Look around the league. The young QB's that have succeeded have had teams around them that could carry them and no one has asked them to carry anything.

Again, for me atleast, your cut on this is that you expect something out of him, mostly tied to a few comments from our HC saying he was ready. A couple of us don't quite see it that way.

Could we be cutting him some slack? Possibly, but again, shouldn't we cut young kids, forced to play before they are ready, some slack?

C'mon, Marr...isn't that a bit of a stretch too? Why do you make it so easy?

Are you trying to tell me that Flacco had a good team around him? He plays in BALTIMORE...where Receivers go to DIE. Now, have they made a concerted effort to improve at that position? This year they did...but Flacco was battling his ass off with not much around him before now.

Sanchez at the Jets isn't surrounded by awesome receivers. Schaub in Houston doesn't have much pro-bowl talent around him. And so on, and so on...

Jackson had a bad receiver corps in 06, a better one in 07, and an even better one in 08. And while the TEAM itself improved - along with Jacksons stats - Jackson himself never really seemed to much. Mostly, he rode other people's success.

Caine
2009
Ray Rice 6th in yards (1339).
Derrick Mason 25th, 73 recpetions/1,028 yards.
2008
Le'Ron McClain 902 yards from a FB
Willis McGahee 671 yards
Ray Rice BAL 454 yards
Derrick Mason 16th, 80 receptions/1,037 yards.
Doesn't sound like chop liver to me.

tarkenton10
05-06-2010, 10:06 AM
C Mac D wrote:

tarkenton10 wrote:

C Mac D wrote:

tarkenton10 wrote:

C Mac D wrote:

marstc09 wrote:

Marrdro wrote:


"I can say it was fine," Jackson said. "When he first came in he pulled me to the side. We were walking to practice one day and he was like, ĎI donít know what youíve heard, but if I can help you with anything just let me know.í I honestly told him, ĎWell, if I can learn anything it will be more by watching than asking questions. Iíd [learn] by me seeing you do certain things and how you do it. If I can see it, I can do it.í [There was] little stuff with the offense that he helped me with as far as the offense goes but I pretty much know the offense. Itís just about going on the field and making it happen.


Jackson: Relationship with Favre was fine (http://www.startribune.com/sports/vikings/blogs/92869214.html)

Sounds a little too cocky to mean. His ass better perform after hearing this crap. I remember there being another comment that he said that pissed me off. I can't find it now. Ask questions you dumb ass.

I didn't take it that way... IMO, when it comes to football, it's easier to learn something by watching it rather than break it down by talking about it. It's why teams watch video week-in and week-out.

Also, people learn differently. Some people are visual learners, some are auditory learners. Jackson is probably more of a visual learner... and by looking at the list of QBs he's had to watch over the past 4 years, it's no wonder some of you think he's developed so poorly.

Everyone else's fault except the person who has to perform. Now he had poor examples. I really am at the point where I hope he starts next year just so the TJ sniffers get their wish. And while I hope he does well posts like this give me that little twing if he performs well. He has no one to blame for his performance good or bad other than himself. I am sure if he does great those no name QBs will not get any credit for his ascention Only those names are brought out to relieve him of any responsibitly for any BAD plays, the good ones he did all by his little ol' self. AMAZING!!! :blink:

lol... read whatever you want, but you also wrote-off his tats when they were good (a 95 QB rating his 3rd year and a 110+ QB rating last year... even after you say it takes 2 years to groom a QB. You contradict yourself). Seems someone just wants to hate on Jackson no matter what. Honestly, it comes off as borderline racist.

You are truly a moron and don't call me a racist you bag of shit you know nothing about me. I have not contradicted myself. His third year he played ok I never said anything else other than it didn't impress me you asshole! And I also said he didn't impress the coaches or he would be starting. The 110 thing is bullshit and you know it. He did mop up duty and played in so few plays I said the data didn't prove anything. Then I said if a second string QB came in a threw a hail mary pass he in the only play he played that year he would have a 140 QB rating. Does that show progress- I got no response. So don't say I am a racist because you are the racist if you think every time someone does not go along with your view they are racist you are putting race into this conversation not me. So don't say that again you dicklicker! See I can use gerogatory remarks too, just stay to the facts!!

Realize it doesn't mean much now, but I thought I was replying to Caine at the time.

It doesn't matter who you were replying to keep race out of it, you don't know anyone on this site well enough to make any kind of remake like that. If you stick with the facts everyone can have a heated debate and be friends in the end!

Marrdro
05-06-2010, 10:07 AM
jargomcfargo wrote:

Now it gets even worse for Jackson. He has to follow Favre.

Damn, I didn't think of that. Excellent point my friend.

In the end, the Noodle will still be pissing me off even after he leaves.

i_bleed_purple
05-06-2010, 10:09 AM
Marrdro wrote:

jargomcfargo wrote:

Now it gets even worse for Jackson. He has to follow Favre.

Damn, I didn't think of that. Excellent point my friend.

In the end, the Noodle will still be pissing me off even after he leaves.:D Then he's done his job

Caine
05-06-2010, 10:20 AM
Marrdro wrote:

Caine wrote:

Marrdro wrote:

Caine wrote:

Jackson has all the PHYSICAL tools to succeed...but he's never demonstrated the mental ability nor the heart to pull one out of the fire (with ONE exception).

Caine
But therein lies the rub doens't it.

Look around the league. The young QB's that have succeeded have had teams around them that could carry them and no one has asked them to carry anything.

Again, for me atleast, your cut on this is that you expect something out of him, mostly tied to a few comments from our HC saying he was ready. A couple of us don't quite see it that way.

Could we be cutting him some slack? Possibly, but again, shouldn't we cut young kids, forced to play before they are ready, some slack?

C'mon, Marr...isn't that a bit of a stretch too? Why do you make it so easy?

Are you trying to tell me that Flacco had a good team around him? He plays in BALTIMORE...where Receivers go to DIE. Now, have they made a concerted effort to improve at that position? This year they did...but Flacco was battling his ass off with not much around him before now.

Sanchez at the Jets isn't surrounded by awesome receivers. Schaub in Houston doesn't have much pro-bowl talent around him. And so on, and so on...

Jackson had a bad receiver corps in 06, a better one in 07, and an even better one in 08. And while the TEAM itself improved - along with Jacksons stats - Jackson himself never really seemed to much. Mostly, he rode other people's success.

Caine
2009
Ray Rice 6th in yards (1339).
Derrick Mason 25th, 73 recpetions/1,028 yards.
2008
Le'Ron McClain 902 yards from a FB
Willis McGahee 671 yards
Ray Rice BAL 454 yards
Derrick Mason 16th, 80 receptions/1,037 yards.
Doesn't sound like chop liver to me.

Yes, Marr...and two of those are Backs, not receivers...are they better than Adrian/Chester? No? Than my point stands. Jackson has had EVERY opportunity to succeed, and simply hasn't. Not on his OWN merits...only on someone elses.

Caine

Marrdro
05-06-2010, 10:22 AM
Caine wrote:

Marrdro wrote:

Caine wrote:

Marrdro wrote:

Caine wrote:

Jackson has all the PHYSICAL tools to succeed...but he's never demonstrated the mental ability nor the heart to pull one out of the fire (with ONE exception).

Caine
But therein lies the rub doens't it.

Look around the league. The young QB's that have succeeded have had teams around them that could carry them and no one has asked them to carry anything.

Again, for me atleast, your cut on this is that you expect something out of him, mostly tied to a few comments from our HC saying he was ready. A couple of us don't quite see it that way.

Could we be cutting him some slack? Possibly, but again, shouldn't we cut young kids, forced to play before they are ready, some slack?

C'mon, Marr...isn't that a bit of a stretch too? Why do you make it so easy?

Are you trying to tell me that Flacco had a good team around him? He plays in BALTIMORE...where Receivers go to DIE. Now, have they made a concerted effort to improve at that position? This year they did...but Flacco was battling his ass off with not much around him before now.

Sanchez at the Jets isn't surrounded by awesome receivers. Schaub in Houston doesn't have much pro-bowl talent around him. And so on, and so on...

Jackson had a bad receiver corps in 06, a better one in 07, and an even better one in 08. And while the TEAM itself improved - along with Jacksons stats - Jackson himself never really seemed to much. Mostly, he rode other people's success.

Caine
2009
Ray Rice 6th in yards (1339).
Derrick Mason 25th, 73 recpetions/1,028 yards.
2008
Le'Ron McClain 902 yards from a FB
Willis McGahee 671 yards
Ray Rice BAL 454 yards
Derrick Mason 16th, 80 receptions/1,037 yards.
Doesn't sound like chop liver to me.

Yes, Marr...and two of those are Backs, not receivers...are they better than Adrian/Chester? No? Than my point stands. Jackson has had EVERY opportunity to succeed, and simply hasn't. Not on his OWN merits...only on someone elses.

Caine
And I agree to a point and that is my point. Teams should carry a young QB, not the other way around.

And those backs stats are rushing stats, not recieving.

Caine
05-06-2010, 10:27 AM
tarkenton10 wrote:

C Mac D wrote:

tarkenton10 wrote:

C Mac D wrote:

tarkenton10 wrote:

C Mac D wrote:

marstc09 wrote:

Marrdro wrote:


"I can say it was fine," Jackson said. "When he first came in he pulled me to the side. We were walking to practice one day and he was like, ĎI donít know what youíve heard, but if I can help you with anything just let me know.í I honestly told him, ĎWell, if I can learn anything it will be more by watching than asking questions. Iíd [learn] by me seeing you do certain things and how you do it. If I can see it, I can do it.í [There was] little stuff with the offense that he helped me with as far as the offense goes but I pretty much know the offense. Itís just about going on the field and making it happen.


Jackson: Relationship with Favre was fine (http://www.startribune.com/sports/vikings/blogs/92869214.html)

Sounds a little too cocky to mean. His ass better perform after hearing this crap. I remember there being another comment that he said that pissed me off. I can't find it now. Ask questions you dumb ass.

I didn't take it that way... IMO, when it comes to football, it's easier to learn something by watching it rather than break it down by talking about it. It's why teams watch video week-in and week-out.

Also, people learn differently. Some people are visual learners, some are auditory learners. Jackson is probably more of a visual learner... and by looking at the list of QBs he's had to watch over the past 4 years, it's no wonder some of you think he's developed so poorly.

Everyone else's fault except the person who has to perform. Now he had poor examples. I really am at the point where I hope he starts next year just so the TJ sniffers get their wish. And while I hope he does well posts like this give me that little twing if he performs well. He has no one to blame for his performance good or bad other than himself. I am sure if he does great those no name QBs will not get any credit for his ascention Only those names are brought out to relieve him of any responsibitly for any BAD plays, the good ones he did all by his little ol' self. AMAZING!!! :blink:

lol... read whatever you want, but you also wrote-off his tats when they were good (a 95 QB rating his 3rd year and a 110+ QB rating last year... even after you say it takes 2 years to groom a QB. You contradict yourself). Seems someone just wants to hate on Jackson no matter what. Honestly, it comes off as borderline racist.

You are truly a moron and don't call me a racist you bag of shit you know nothing about me. I have not contradicted myself. His third year he played ok I never said anything else other than it didn't impress me you asshole! And I also said he didn't impress the coaches or he would be starting. The 110 thing is bullshit and you know it. He did mop up duty and played in so few plays I said the data didn't prove anything. Then I said if a second string QB came in a threw a hail mary pass he in the only play he played that year he would have a 140 QB rating. Does that show progress- I got no response. So don't say I am a racist because you are the racist if you think every time someone does not go along with your view they are racist you are putting race into this conversation not me. So don't say that again you dicklicker! See I can use gerogatory remarks too, just stay to the facts!!

Realize it doesn't mean much now, but I thought I was replying to Caine at the time.

It doesn't matter who you were replying to keep race out of it, you don't know anyone on this site well enough to make any kind of remake like that. If you stick with the facts everyone can have a heated debate and be friends in the end!

C Mac is incapable of sticking to facts. In order to "win", he frequently ignores opposing points completely, (especially when they invalidate his assertions), bases his illusory points in subjective statements which can neither be proven nor disproven, or simply manufactures baseless accusations in order to derail the current line of debate and drive it into irrelevancy.

This is further evidenced by his comment that he used the "racist" comment because he thought he was replying to me...even though the substance of the conversation contained nothing to warrant such an accusation.

Your original reply, Tark, was 100% dead on.

Caine

Caine
05-06-2010, 10:32 AM
Marrdro wrote:

Caine wrote:

Marrdro wrote:

Caine wrote:

Marrdro wrote:

Caine wrote:

Jackson has all the PHYSICAL tools to succeed...but he's never demonstrated the mental ability nor the heart to pull one out of the fire (with ONE exception).

Caine
But therein lies the rub doens't it.

Look around the league. The young QB's that have succeeded have had teams around them that could carry them and no one has asked them to carry anything.

Again, for me atleast, your cut on this is that you expect something out of him, mostly tied to a few comments from our HC saying he was ready. A couple of us don't quite see it that way.

Could we be cutting him some slack? Possibly, but again, shouldn't we cut young kids, forced to play before they are ready, some slack?

C'mon, Marr...isn't that a bit of a stretch too? Why do you make it so easy?

Are you trying to tell me that Flacco had a good team around him? He plays in BALTIMORE...where Receivers go to DIE. Now, have they made a concerted effort to improve at that position? This year they did...but Flacco was battling his ass off with not much around him before now.

Sanchez at the Jets isn't surrounded by awesome receivers. Schaub in Houston doesn't have much pro-bowl talent around him. And so on, and so on...

Jackson had a bad receiver corps in 06, a better one in 07, and an even better one in 08. And while the TEAM itself improved - along with Jacksons stats - Jackson himself never really seemed to much. Mostly, he rode other people's success.

Caine
2009
Ray Rice 6th in yards (1339).
Derrick Mason 25th, 73 recpetions/1,028 yards.
2008
Le'Ron McClain 902 yards from a FB
Willis McGahee 671 yards
Ray Rice BAL 454 yards
Derrick Mason 16th, 80 receptions/1,037 yards.
Doesn't sound like chop liver to me.

Yes, Marr...and two of those are Backs, not receivers...are they better than Adrian/Chester? No? Than my point stands. Jackson has had EVERY opportunity to succeed, and simply hasn't. Not on his OWN merits...only on someone elses.

Caine
And I agree to a point and that is my point. Teams should carry a young QB, not the other way around.

And those backs stats are rushing stats, not recieving.

And yet all of the "Successful" young QB's are NOT being "carried"...they are leading the charge. Something Jackson hasn't done.

Jackson is a cookie cutter QB. We can drop almost anyone in there and get the same results.

Caine

i_bleed_purple
05-06-2010, 10:35 AM
Joe Flacco, didn't put up teriffic stats, but he was cool, calm and collected in the pocket under pressure and made the throws when it counted. Hell, he led a comeback against the pats, if not for a Derrick Mason drop, they would have probably won.

Matt Ryan (pre-Gonzalez) also led the Falcons. yes, they had Turner put up 1700 yards, but he took advantage, and won.

Mark Sanchez used his weapons such as Braylon Edwards? to do enough to win. When there were wide open guys, he actually hit them instead of not seeing or missing them. Yes, he was highly overrated, but he still played effectively.

Marrdro
05-06-2010, 10:40 AM
Caine wrote:

Marrdro wrote:

Caine wrote:

Marrdro wrote:

Caine wrote:

Marrdro wrote:

Caine wrote:

Jackson has all the PHYSICAL tools to succeed...but he's never demonstrated the mental ability nor the heart to pull one out of the fire (with ONE exception).

Caine
But therein lies the rub doens't it.

Look around the league. The young QB's that have succeeded have had teams around them that could carry them and no one has asked them to carry anything.

Again, for me atleast, your cut on this is that you expect something out of him, mostly tied to a few comments from our HC saying he was ready. A couple of us don't quite see it that way.

Could we be cutting him some slack? Possibly, but again, shouldn't we cut young kids, forced to play before they are ready, some slack?

C'mon, Marr...isn't that a bit of a stretch too? Why do you make it so easy?

Are you trying to tell me that Flacco had a good team around him? He plays in BALTIMORE...where Receivers go to DIE. Now, have they made a concerted effort to improve at that position? This year they did...but Flacco was battling his ass off with not much around him before now.

Sanchez at the Jets isn't surrounded by awesome receivers. Schaub in Houston doesn't have much pro-bowl talent around him. And so on, and so on...

Jackson had a bad receiver corps in 06, a better one in 07, and an even better one in 08. And while the TEAM itself improved - along with Jacksons stats - Jackson himself never really seemed to much. Mostly, he rode other people's success.

Caine
2009
Ray Rice 6th in yards (1339).
Derrick Mason 25th, 73 recpetions/1,028 yards.
2008
Le'Ron McClain 902 yards from a FB
Willis McGahee 671 yards
Ray Rice BAL 454 yards
Derrick Mason 16th, 80 receptions/1,037 yards.
Doesn't sound like chop liver to me.

Yes, Marr...and two of those are Backs, not receivers...are they better than Adrian/Chester? No? Than my point stands. Jackson has had EVERY opportunity to succeed, and simply hasn't. Not on his OWN merits...only on someone elses.

Caine
And I agree to a point and that is my point. Teams should carry a young QB, not the other way around.

And those backs stats are rushing stats, not recieving.

And yet all of the "Successful" young QB's are NOT being "carried"...they are leading the charge. Something Jackson hasn't done.

Jackson is a cookie cutter QB. We can drop almost anyone in there and get the same results.

Caine
Sanchez threw 12 TD's to 20 INT's. That is hardly "Leading the charge" my friend.

Ryan was asked to to more last year, with very little success and that was even after they added arguably the best TE in the league.

Marrdro
05-06-2010, 10:42 AM
i_bleed_purple wrote:

Joe Flacco, didn't put up teriffic stats, but he was cool, calm and collected in the pocket under pressure and made the throws when it counted. Hell, he led a comeback against the pats, if not for a Derrick Mason drop, they would have probably won.

Matt Ryan (pre-Gonzalez) also led the Falcons. yes, they had Turner put up 1700 yards, but he took advantage, and won.

Mark Sanchez used his weapons such as Braylon Edwards? to do enough to win. When there were wide open guys, he actually hit them instead of not seeing or missing them. Yes, he was highly overrated, but he still played effectively.
See, even you are trying to put a positive spin on performances that weren't quite "Franchiseesc".....

i_bleed_purple
05-06-2010, 10:45 AM
Marrdro wrote:

Caine wrote:

Marrdro wrote:

Caine wrote:

Marrdro wrote:

Caine wrote:

Marrdro wrote:

Caine wrote:

Jackson has all the PHYSICAL tools to succeed...but he's never demonstrated the mental ability nor the heart to pull one out of the fire (with ONE exception).

Caine
But therein lies the rub doens't it.

Look around the league. The young QB's that have succeeded have had teams around them that could carry them and no one has asked them to carry anything.

Again, for me atleast, your cut on this is that you expect something out of him, mostly tied to a few comments from our HC saying he was ready. A couple of us don't quite see it that way.

Could we be cutting him some slack? Possibly, but again, shouldn't we cut young kids, forced to play before they are ready, some slack?

C'mon, Marr...isn't that a bit of a stretch too? Why do you make it so easy?

Are you trying to tell me that Flacco had a good team around him? He plays in BALTIMORE...where Receivers go to DIE. Now, have they made a concerted effort to improve at that position? This year they did...but Flacco was battling his ass off with not much around him before now.

Sanchez at the Jets isn't surrounded by awesome receivers. Schaub in Houston doesn't have much pro-bowl talent around him. And so on, and so on...

Jackson had a bad receiver corps in 06, a better one in 07, and an even better one in 08. And while the TEAM itself improved - along with Jacksons stats - Jackson himself never really seemed to much. Mostly, he rode other people's success.

Caine
2009
Ray Rice 6th in yards (1339).
Derrick Mason 25th, 73 recpetions/1,028 yards.
2008
Le'Ron McClain 902 yards from a FB
Willis McGahee 671 yards
Ray Rice BAL 454 yards
Derrick Mason 16th, 80 receptions/1,037 yards.
Doesn't sound like chop liver to me.

Yes, Marr...and two of those are Backs, not receivers...are they better than Adrian/Chester? No? Than my point stands. Jackson has had EVERY opportunity to succeed, and simply hasn't. Not on his OWN merits...only on someone elses.

Caine
And I agree to a point and that is my point. Teams should carry a young QB, not the other way around.

And those backs stats are rushing stats, not recieving.

And yet all of the "Successful" young QB's are NOT being "carried"...they are leading the charge. Something Jackson hasn't done.

Jackson is a cookie cutter QB. We can drop almost anyone in there and get the same results.

Caine
Sanchez threw 12 TD's to 20 INT's. That is hardly "Leading the charge" my friend.

Ryan was asked to to more last year, with very little success and that was even after they added arguably the best TE in the league.

and an injured runningback

Marrdro
05-06-2010, 10:54 AM
i_bleed_purple wrote:

Marrdro wrote:

Caine wrote:

Marrdro wrote:

Caine wrote:

Marrdro wrote:

Caine wrote:

Marrdro wrote:

Caine wrote:

Jackson has all the PHYSICAL tools to succeed...but he's never demonstrated the mental ability nor the heart to pull one out of the fire (with ONE exception).

Caine
But therein lies the rub doens't it.

Look around the league. The young QB's that have succeeded have had teams around them that could carry them and no one has asked them to carry anything.

Again, for me atleast, your cut on this is that you expect something out of him, mostly tied to a few comments from our HC saying he was ready. A couple of us don't quite see it that way.

Could we be cutting him some slack? Possibly, but again, shouldn't we cut young kids, forced to play before they are ready, some slack?

C'mon, Marr...isn't that a bit of a stretch too? Why do you make it so easy?

Are you trying to tell me that Flacco had a good team around him? He plays in BALTIMORE...where Receivers go to DIE. Now, have they made a concerted effort to improve at that position? This year they did...but Flacco was battling his ass off with not much around him before now.

Sanchez at the Jets isn't surrounded by awesome receivers. Schaub in Houston doesn't have much pro-bowl talent around him. And so on, and so on...

Jackson had a bad receiver corps in 06, a better one in 07, and an even better one in 08. And while the TEAM itself improved - along with Jacksons stats - Jackson himself never really seemed to much. Mostly, he rode other people's success.

Caine
2009
Ray Rice 6th in yards (1339).
Derrick Mason 25th, 73 recpetions/1,028 yards.
2008
Le'Ron McClain 902 yards from a FB
Willis McGahee 671 yards
Ray Rice BAL 454 yards
Derrick Mason 16th, 80 receptions/1,037 yards.
Doesn't sound like chop liver to me.

Yes, Marr...and two of those are Backs, not receivers...are they better than Adrian/Chester? No? Than my point stands. Jackson has had EVERY opportunity to succeed, and simply hasn't. Not on his OWN merits...only on someone elses.

Caine
And I agree to a point and that is my point. Teams should carry a young QB, not the other way around.

And those backs stats are rushing stats, not recieving.

And yet all of the "Successful" young QB's are NOT being "carried"...they are leading the charge. Something Jackson hasn't done.

Jackson is a cookie cutter QB. We can drop almost anyone in there and get the same results.

Caine
Sanchez threw 12 TD's to 20 INT's. That is hardly "Leading the charge" my friend.

Ryan was asked to to more last year, with very little success and that was even after they added arguably the best TE in the league.

and an injured runningback
You just made my point for me. Without the RB he wasn't as productive, even with the addition of the new TE.

Again, good teams can carry a QB, a young QB cannot carry a team (in most instances).

tarkenton10
05-06-2010, 11:02 AM
Caine wrote:

tarkenton10 wrote:

C Mac D wrote:

tarkenton10 wrote:

C Mac D wrote:

tarkenton10 wrote:

C Mac D wrote:

marstc09 wrote:

Marrdro wrote:


"I can say it was fine," Jackson said. "When he first came in he pulled me to the side. We were walking to practice one day and he was like, ĎI donít know what youíve heard, but if I can help you with anything just let me know.í I honestly told him, ĎWell, if I can learn anything it will be more by watching than asking questions. Iíd [learn] by me seeing you do certain things and how you do it. If I can see it, I can do it.í [There was] little stuff with the offense that he helped me with as far as the offense goes but I pretty much know the offense. Itís just about going on the field and making it happen.


Jackson: Relationship with Favre was fine (http://www.startribune.com/sports/vikings/blogs/92869214.html)

Sounds a little too cocky to mean. His ass better perform after hearing this crap. I remember there being another comment that he said that pissed me off. I can't find it now. Ask questions you dumb ass.

I didn't take it that way... IMO, when it comes to football, it's easier to learn something by watching it rather than break it down by talking about it. It's why teams watch video week-in and week-out.

Also, people learn differently. Some people are visual learners, some are auditory learners. Jackson is probably more of a visual learner... and by looking at the list of QBs he's had to watch over the past 4 years, it's no wonder some of you think he's developed so poorly.

Everyone else's fault except the person who has to perform. Now he had poor examples. I really am at the point where I hope he starts next year just so the TJ sniffers get their wish. And while I hope he does well posts like this give me that little twing if he performs well. He has no one to blame for his performance good or bad other than himself. I am sure if he does great those no name QBs will not get any credit for his ascention Only those names are brought out to relieve him of any responsibitly for any BAD plays, the good ones he did all by his little ol' self. AMAZING!!! :blink:

lol... read whatever you want, but you also wrote-off his tats when they were good (a 95 QB rating his 3rd year and a 110+ QB rating last year... even after you say it takes 2 years to groom a QB. You contradict yourself). Seems someone just wants to hate on Jackson no matter what. Honestly, it comes off as borderline racist.

You are truly a moron and don't call me a racist you bag of shit you know nothing about me. I have not contradicted myself. His third year he played ok I never said anything else other than it didn't impress me you asshole! And I also said he didn't impress the coaches or he would be starting. The 110 thing is bullshit and you know it. He did mop up duty and played in so few plays I said the data didn't prove anything. Then I said if a second string QB came in a threw a hail mary pass he in the only play he played that year he would have a 140 QB rating. Does that show progress- I got no response. So don't say I am a racist because you are the racist if you think every time someone does not go along with your view they are racist you are putting race into this conversation not me. So don't say that again you dicklicker! See I can use gerogatory remarks too, just stay to the facts!!

Realize it doesn't mean much now, but I thought I was replying to Caine at the time.

It doesn't matter who you were replying to keep race out of it, you don't know anyone on this site well enough to make any kind of remake like that. If you stick with the facts everyone can have a heated debate and be friends in the end!

C Mac is incapable of sticking to facts. In order to "win", he frequently ignores opposing points completely, (especially when they invalidate his assertions), bases his illusory points in subjective statements which can neither be proven nor disproven, or simply manufactures baseless accusations in order to derail the current line of debate and drive it into irrelevancy.

This is further evidenced by his comment that he used the "racist" comment because he thought he was replying to me...even though the substance of the conversation contained nothing to warrant such an accusation.

Your original reply, Tark, was 100% dead on.

Caine

Than you my friend (Marrdrroeze) for thank you my friend :laugh: I do find CMac tends to be condescending and even sarcastic but even that is tolerable but you cross a line at some point. Especially when how well do you really know anyone on this site. Some may be friends but the majority of the people on this site are strangers.

i_bleed_purple
05-06-2010, 11:11 AM
Marrdro wrote:

i_bleed_purple wrote:

Marrdro wrote:

Caine wrote:

Marrdro wrote:

Caine wrote:

Marrdro wrote:

Caine wrote:

Marrdro wrote:

Caine wrote:

Jackson has all the PHYSICAL tools to succeed...but he's never demonstrated the mental ability nor the heart to pull one out of the fire (with ONE exception).

Caine
But therein lies the rub doens't it.

Look around the league. The young QB's that have succeeded have had teams around them that could carry them and no one has asked them to carry anything.

Again, for me atleast, your cut on this is that you expect something out of him, mostly tied to a few comments from our HC saying he was ready. A couple of us don't quite see it that way.

Could we be cutting him some slack? Possibly, but again, shouldn't we cut young kids, forced to play before they are ready, some slack?

C'mon, Marr...isn't that a bit of a stretch too? Why do you make it so easy?

Are you trying to tell me that Flacco had a good team around him? He plays in BALTIMORE...where Receivers go to DIE. Now, have they made a concerted effort to improve at that position? This year they did...but Flacco was battling his ass off with not much around him before now.

Sanchez at the Jets isn't surrounded by awesome receivers. Schaub in Houston doesn't have much pro-bowl talent around him. And so on, and so on...

Jackson had a bad receiver corps in 06, a better one in 07, and an even better one in 08. And while the TEAM itself improved - along with Jacksons stats - Jackson himself never really seemed to much. Mostly, he rode other people's success.

Caine
2009
Ray Rice 6th in yards (1339).
Derrick Mason 25th, 73 recpetions/1,028 yards.
2008
Le'Ron McClain 902 yards from a FB
Willis McGahee 671 yards
Ray Rice BAL 454 yards
Derrick Mason 16th, 80 receptions/1,037 yards.
Doesn't sound like chop liver to me.

Yes, Marr...and two of those are Backs, not receivers...are they better than Adrian/Chester? No? Than my point stands. Jackson has had EVERY opportunity to succeed, and simply hasn't. Not on his OWN merits...only on someone elses.

Caine
And I agree to a point and that is my point. Teams should carry a young QB, not the other way around.

And those backs stats are rushing stats, not recieving.

And yet all of the "Successful" young QB's are NOT being "carried"...they are leading the charge. Something Jackson hasn't done.

Jackson is a cookie cutter QB. We can drop almost anyone in there and get the same results.

Caine
Sanchez threw 12 TD's to 20 INT's. That is hardly "Leading the charge" my friend.

Ryan was asked to to more last year, with very little success and that was even after they added arguably the best TE in the league.

and an injured runningback
You just made my point for me. Without the RB he wasn't as productive, even with the addition of the new TE.

Again, good teams can carry a QB, a young QB cannot carry a team (in most instances).

that is no point. That will be the case with any team. If AD goes down and teams start playing the pass, I bet Favre's nubmers go down too. If Chris Johnson gets hurt, I bet Vince Young puts up 30 interceptions. Brandon Jacobs was off this year, and Eli didn't have a great season either.

Marvin Harrison got hurt, and Peyton's stats suffered. It happens on EVERY SINGLE TEAM.

Add a TE, take away a run game and let the D Focus on the pass... hmm... wonder what will happen?

When Turner was healthy, he was still putting up great numbers, and since teams wer eplaying the Run, So did Ryan.

Look at a couple examples:
Week 2: Car, Turner: 105 yds, Ryan: 220 yds, 3 TD's

Week 8: NO Loss, Turner: 151 yds, Ryan, 289 yds, but 3 ints

Week 9: Was Win, 166 yds, Ryan: 70%, 135 yds.

Towards the end of the season, sans Turner, Ryan also didn't do as well, because teams didn't have to focus on Turner

Turner put up a 4.9 yard average with 10 tds in 10 games running straight up the gut. That would help Ryan, that would help Favre, that would help Brady and Manning.

Marrdro
05-06-2010, 11:16 AM
i_bleed_purple wrote:

Marrdro wrote:

i_bleed_purple wrote:

Marrdro wrote:

Caine wrote:

Marrdro wrote:

Caine wrote:

Marrdro wrote:

Caine wrote:

Marrdro wrote:

Caine wrote:

Jackson has all the PHYSICAL tools to succeed...but he's never demonstrated the mental ability nor the heart to pull one out of the fire (with ONE exception).

Caine
But therein lies the rub doens't it.

Look around the league. The young QB's that have succeeded have had teams around them that could carry them and no one has asked them to carry anything.

Again, for me atleast, your cut on this is that you expect something out of him, mostly tied to a few comments from our HC saying he was ready. A couple of us don't quite see it that way.

Could we be cutting him some slack? Possibly, but again, shouldn't we cut young kids, forced to play before they are ready, some slack?

C'mon, Marr...isn't that a bit of a stretch too? Why do you make it so easy?

Are you trying to tell me that Flacco had a good team around him? He plays in BALTIMORE...where Receivers go to DIE. Now, have they made a concerted effort to improve at that position? This year they did...but Flacco was battling his ass off with not much around him before now.

Sanchez at the Jets isn't surrounded by awesome receivers. Schaub in Houston doesn't have much pro-bowl talent around him. And so on, and so on...

Jackson had a bad receiver corps in 06, a better one in 07, and an even better one in 08. And while the TEAM itself improved - along with Jacksons stats - Jackson himself never really seemed to much. Mostly, he rode other people's success.

Caine
2009
Ray Rice 6th in yards (1339).
Derrick Mason 25th, 73 recpetions/1,028 yards.
2008
Le'Ron McClain 902 yards from a FB
Willis McGahee 671 yards
Ray Rice BAL 454 yards
Derrick Mason 16th, 80 receptions/1,037 yards.
Doesn't sound like chop liver to me.

Yes, Marr...and two of those are Backs, not receivers...are they better than Adrian/Chester? No? Than my point stands. Jackson has had EVERY opportunity to succeed, and simply hasn't. Not on his OWN merits...only on someone elses.

Caine
And I agree to a point and that is my point. Teams should carry a young QB, not the other way around.

And those backs stats are rushing stats, not recieving.

And yet all of the "Successful" young QB's are NOT being "carried"...they are leading the charge. Something Jackson hasn't done.

Jackson is a cookie cutter QB. We can drop almost anyone in there and get the same results.

Caine
Sanchez threw 12 TD's to 20 INT's. That is hardly "Leading the charge" my friend.

Ryan was asked to to more last year, with very little success and that was even after they added arguably the best TE in the league.

and an injured runningback
You just made my point for me. Without the RB he wasn't as productive, even with the addition of the new TE.

Again, good teams can carry a QB, a young QB cannot carry a team (in most instances).

that is no point. That will be the case with any team. If AD goes down and teams start playing the pass, I bet Favre's nubmers go down too. If Chris Johnson gets hurt, I bet Vince Young puts up 30 interceptions. Brandon Jacobs was off this year, and Eli didn't have a great season either.

Marvin Harrison got hurt, and Peyton's stats suffered. It happens on EVERY SINGLE TEAM.

Add a TE, take away a run game and let the D Focus on the pass... hmm... wonder what will happen?

When Turner was healthy, he was still putting up great numbers, and since teams wer eplaying the Run, So did Ryan.

Look at a couple examples:
Week 2: Car, Turner: 105 yds, Ryan: 220 yds, 3 TD's

Week 8: NO Loss, Turner: 151 yds, Ryan, 289 yds, but 3 ints

Week 9: Was Win, 166 yds, Ryan: 70%, 135 yds.

Towards the end of the season, sans Turner, Ryan also didn't do as well, because teams didn't have to focus on Turner

Turner put up a 4.9 yard average with 10 tds in 10 games running straight up the gut. That would help Ryan, that would help Favre, that would help Brady and Manning.
Sounds like your point is that it is a team effort and without all the pieces clicking, even the great ones (not to mention a 1-AA QB from a running school) will struggle at times.

Again, thats the point I'm trying to make.

i_bleed_purple
05-06-2010, 11:22 AM
Marrdro wrote:

i_bleed_purple wrote:

Marrdro wrote:

i_bleed_purple wrote:

Marrdro wrote:

Caine wrote:

Marrdro wrote:

Caine wrote:

Marrdro wrote:

Caine wrote:

Marrdro wrote:

Caine wrote:

Jackson has all the PHYSICAL tools to succeed...but he's never demonstrated the mental ability nor the heart to pull one out of the fire (with ONE exception).

Caine
But therein lies the rub doens't it.

Look around the league. The young QB's that have succeeded have had teams around them that could carry them and no one has asked them to carry anything.

Again, for me atleast, your cut on this is that you expect something out of him, mostly tied to a few comments from our HC saying he was ready. A couple of us don't quite see it that way.

Could we be cutting him some slack? Possibly, but again, shouldn't we cut young kids, forced to play before they are ready, some slack?

C'mon, Marr...isn't that a bit of a stretch too? Why do you make it so easy?

Are you trying to tell me that Flacco had a good team around him? He plays in BALTIMORE...where Receivers go to DIE. Now, have they made a concerted effort to improve at that position? This year they did...but Flacco was battling his ass off with not much around him before now.

Sanchez at the Jets isn't surrounded by awesome receivers. Schaub in Houston doesn't have much pro-bowl talent around him. And so on, and so on...

Jackson had a bad receiver corps in 06, a better one in 07, and an even better one in 08. And while the TEAM itself improved - along with Jacksons stats - Jackson himself never really seemed to much. Mostly, he rode other people's success.

Caine
2009
Ray Rice 6th in yards (1339).
Derrick Mason 25th, 73 recpetions/1,028 yards.
2008
Le'Ron McClain 902 yards from a FB
Willis McGahee 671 yards
Ray Rice BAL 454 yards
Derrick Mason 16th, 80 receptions/1,037 yards.
Doesn't sound like chop liver to me.

Yes, Marr...and two of those are Backs, not receivers...are they better than Adrian/Chester? No? Than my point stands. Jackson has had EVERY opportunity to succeed, and simply hasn't. Not on his OWN merits...only on someone elses.

Caine
And I agree to a point and that is my point. Teams should carry a young QB, not the other way around.

And those backs stats are rushing stats, not recieving.

And yet all of the "Successful" young QB's are NOT being "carried"...they are leading the charge. Something Jackson hasn't done.

Jackson is a cookie cutter QB. We can drop almost anyone in there and get the same results.

Caine
Sanchez threw 12 TD's to 20 INT's. That is hardly "Leading the charge" my friend.

Ryan was asked to to more last year, with very little success and that was even after they added arguably the best TE in the league.

and an injured runningback
You just made my point for me. Without the RB he wasn't as productive, even with the addition of the new TE.

Again, good teams can carry a QB, a young QB cannot carry a team (in most instances).

that is no point. That will be the case with any team. If AD goes down and teams start playing the pass, I bet Favre's nubmers go down too. If Chris Johnson gets hurt, I bet Vince Young puts up 30 interceptions. Brandon Jacobs was off this year, and Eli didn't have a great season either.

Marvin Harrison got hurt, and Peyton's stats suffered. It happens on EVERY SINGLE TEAM.

Add a TE, take away a run game and let the D Focus on the pass... hmm... wonder what will happen?

When Turner was healthy, he was still putting up great numbers, and since teams wer eplaying the Run, So did Ryan.

Look at a couple examples:
Week 2: Car, Turner: 105 yds, Ryan: 220 yds, 3 TD's

Week 8: NO Loss, Turner: 151 yds, Ryan, 289 yds, but 3 ints

Week 9: Was Win, 166 yds, Ryan: 70%, 135 yds.

Towards the end of the season, sans Turner, Ryan also didn't do as well, because teams didn't have to focus on Turner

Turner put up a 4.9 yard average with 10 tds in 10 games running straight up the gut. That would help Ryan, that would help Favre, that would help Brady and Manning.
Sounds like your point is that it is a team effort and without all the pieces clicking, even the great ones (not to mention a 1-AA QB from a running school) will struggle at times.

Again, thats the point I'm trying to make.

Yes, it is a team sport, and we need all parts to click. Some QB's are capable of making up for shortcomings of other players. TJ has not been able to do that. We had crap receivers when he came into the league, and his performance was nothing short of pure crap. We improved the next year, and his performance got better. We had a pretty decent team then, but his play waas only mediocre at best. We continued to improve, and his mediocre play continued. We were at our best last season, but didn't get a chance to see him play.

I've said before, I hope he's grown, I'd love to give him one last shot, but I'm not holding my breath and won't be shocked if it doesn't work.

Marrdro
05-06-2010, 11:33 AM
i_bleed_purple wrote:

Marrdro wrote:

i_bleed_purple wrote:

Marrdro wrote:

i_bleed_purple wrote:

Marrdro wrote:

Caine wrote:

Marrdro wrote:

Caine wrote:

Marrdro wrote:

Caine wrote:

Marrdro wrote:

Caine wrote:

Jackson has all the PHYSICAL tools to succeed...but he's never demonstrated the mental ability nor the heart to pull one out of the fire (with ONE exception).

Caine
But therein lies the rub doens't it.

Look around the league. The young QB's that have succeeded have had teams around them that could carry them and no one has asked them to carry anything.

Again, for me atleast, your cut on this is that you expect something out of him, mostly tied to a few comments from our HC saying he was ready. A couple of us don't quite see it that way.

Could we be cutting him some slack? Possibly, but again, shouldn't we cut young kids, forced to play before they are ready, some slack?

C'mon, Marr...isn't that a bit of a stretch too? Why do you make it so easy?

Are you trying to tell me that Flacco had a good team around him? He plays in BALTIMORE...where Receivers go to DIE. Now, have they made a concerted effort to improve at that position? This year they did...but Flacco was battling his ass off with not much around him before now.

Sanchez at the Jets isn't surrounded by awesome receivers. Schaub in Houston doesn't have much pro-bowl talent around him. And so on, and so on...

Jackson had a bad receiver corps in 06, a better one in 07, and an even better one in 08. And while the TEAM itself improved - along with Jacksons stats - Jackson himself never really seemed to much. Mostly, he rode other people's success.

Caine
2009
Ray Rice 6th in yards (1339).
Derrick Mason 25th, 73 recpetions/1,028 yards.
2008
Le'Ron McClain 902 yards from a FB
Willis McGahee 671 yards
Ray Rice BAL 454 yards
Derrick Mason 16th, 80 receptions/1,037 yards.
Doesn't sound like chop liver to me.

Yes, Marr...and two of those are Backs, not receivers...are they better than Adrian/Chester? No? Than my point stands. Jackson has had EVERY opportunity to succeed, and simply hasn't. Not on his OWN merits...only on someone elses.

Caine
And I agree to a point and that is my point. Teams should carry a young QB, not the other way around.

And those backs stats are rushing stats, not recieving.

And yet all of the "Successful" young QB's are NOT being "carried"...they are leading the charge. Something Jackson hasn't done.

Jackson is a cookie cutter QB. We can drop almost anyone in there and get the same results.

Caine
Sanchez threw 12 TD's to 20 INT's. That is hardly "Leading the charge" my friend.

Ryan was asked to to more last year, with very little success and that was even after they added arguably the best TE in the league.

and an injured runningback
You just made my point for me. Without the RB he wasn't as productive, even with the addition of the new TE.

Again, good teams can carry a QB, a young QB cannot carry a team (in most instances).

that is no point. That will be the case with any team. If AD goes down and teams start playing the pass, I bet Favre's nubmers go down too. If Chris Johnson gets hurt, I bet Vince Young puts up 30 interceptions. Brandon Jacobs was off this year, and Eli didn't have a great season either.

Marvin Harrison got hurt, and Peyton's stats suffered. It happens on EVERY SINGLE TEAM.

Add a TE, take away a run game and let the D Focus on the pass... hmm... wonder what will happen?

When Turner was healthy, he was still putting up great numbers, and since teams wer eplaying the Run, So did Ryan.

Look at a couple examples:
Week 2: Car, Turner: 105 yds, Ryan: 220 yds, 3 TD's

Week 8: NO Loss, Turner: 151 yds, Ryan, 289 yds, but 3 ints

Week 9: Was Win, 166 yds, Ryan: 70%, 135 yds.

Towards the end of the season, sans Turner, Ryan also didn't do as well, because teams didn't have to focus on Turner

Turner put up a 4.9 yard average with 10 tds in 10 games running straight up the gut. That would help Ryan, that would help Favre, that would help Brady and Manning.
Sounds like your point is that it is a team effort and without all the pieces clicking, even the great ones (not to mention a 1-AA QB from a running school) will struggle at times.

Again, thats the point I'm trying to make.

Yes, it is a team sport, and we need all parts to click. Some QB's are capable of making up for shortcomings of other players. TJ has not been able to do that. We had crap receivers when he came into the league, and his performance was nothing short of pure crap. We improved the next year, and his performance got better. We had a pretty decent team then, but his play waas only mediocre at best. We continued to improve, and his mediocre play continued. We were at our best last season, but didn't get a chance to see him play.

I've said before, I hope he's grown, I'd love to give him one last shot, but I'm not holding my breath and won't be shocked if it doesn't work.
As I told Caine in another post, if he doesn't show improvement this year, I will be ready to throw him under the bus (again) just like I have done for all of the players I feel aren't cutting it.

It just so happens that I can't help but believe that most of our opinions are based on a dislike of a player who didn't perform up to our standards.

Maybe, just maybe, we were setting to high of a set of standards for him especially when you look at his supporting cast, is all I'm saying.

i_bleed_purple
05-06-2010, 11:35 AM
Marrdro wrote:

i_bleed_purple wrote:

Marrdro wrote:

i_bleed_purple wrote:

Marrdro wrote:

i_bleed_purple wrote:

Marrdro wrote:

Caine wrote:

Marrdro wrote:

Caine wrote:

Marrdro wrote:

Caine wrote:

Marrdro wrote:

Caine wrote:

Jackson has all the PHYSICAL tools to succeed...but he's never demonstrated the mental ability nor the heart to pull one out of the fire (with ONE exception).

Caine
But therein lies the rub doens't it.

Look around the league. The young QB's that have succeeded have had teams around them that could carry them and no one has asked them to carry anything.

Again, for me atleast, your cut on this is that you expect something out of him, mostly tied to a few comments from our HC saying he was ready. A couple of us don't quite see it that way.

Could we be cutting him some slack? Possibly, but again, shouldn't we cut young kids, forced to play before they are ready, some slack?

C'mon, Marr...isn't that a bit of a stretch too? Why do you make it so easy?

Are you trying to tell me that Flacco had a good team around him? He plays in BALTIMORE...where Receivers go to DIE. Now, have they made a concerted effort to improve at that position? This year they did...but Flacco was battling his ass off with not much around him before now.

Sanchez at the Jets isn't surrounded by awesome receivers. Schaub in Houston doesn't have much pro-bowl talent around him. And so on, and so on...

Jackson had a bad receiver corps in 06, a better one in 07, and an even better one in 08. And while the TEAM itself improved - along with Jacksons stats - Jackson himself never really seemed to much. Mostly, he rode other people's success.

Caine
2009
Ray Rice 6th in yards (1339).
Derrick Mason 25th, 73 recpetions/1,028 yards.
2008
Le'Ron McClain 902 yards from a FB
Willis McGahee 671 yards
Ray Rice BAL 454 yards
Derrick Mason 16th, 80 receptions/1,037 yards.
Doesn't sound like chop liver to me.

Yes, Marr...and two of those are Backs, not receivers...are they better than Adrian/Chester? No? Than my point stands. Jackson has had EVERY opportunity to succeed, and simply hasn't. Not on his OWN merits...only on someone elses.

Caine
And I agree to a point and that is my point. Teams should carry a young QB, not the other way around.

And those backs stats are rushing stats, not recieving.

And yet all of the "Successful" young QB's are NOT being "carried"...they are leading the charge. Something Jackson hasn't done.

Jackson is a cookie cutter QB. We can drop almost anyone in there and get the same results.

Caine
Sanchez threw 12 TD's to 20 INT's. That is hardly "Leading the charge" my friend.

Ryan was asked to to more last year, with very little success and that was even after they added arguably the best TE in the league.

and an injured runningback
You just made my point for me. Without the RB he wasn't as productive, even with the addition of the new TE.

Again, good teams can carry a QB, a young QB cannot carry a team (in most instances).

that is no point. That will be the case with any team. If AD goes down and teams start playing the pass, I bet Favre's nubmers go down too. If Chris Johnson gets hurt, I bet Vince Young puts up 30 interceptions. Brandon Jacobs was off this year, and Eli didn't have a great season either.

Marvin Harrison got hurt, and Peyton's stats suffered. It happens on EVERY SINGLE TEAM.

Add a TE, take away a run game and let the D Focus on the pass... hmm... wonder what will happen?

When Turner was healthy, he was still putting up great numbers, and since teams wer eplaying the Run, So did Ryan.

Look at a couple examples:
Week 2: Car, Turner: 105 yds, Ryan: 220 yds, 3 TD's

Week 8: NO Loss, Turner: 151 yds, Ryan, 289 yds, but 3 ints

Week 9: Was Win, 166 yds, Ryan: 70%, 135 yds.

Towards the end of the season, sans Turner, Ryan also didn't do as well, because teams didn't have to focus on Turner

Turner put up a 4.9 yard average with 10 tds in 10 games running straight up the gut. That would help Ryan, that would help Favre, that would help Brady and Manning.
Sounds like your point is that it is a team effort and without all the pieces clicking, even the great ones (not to mention a 1-AA QB from a running school) will struggle at times.

Again, thats the point I'm trying to make.

Yes, it is a team sport, and we need all parts to click. Some QB's are capable of making up for shortcomings of other players. TJ has not been able to do that. We had crap receivers when he came into the league, and his performance was nothing short of pure crap. We improved the next year, and his performance got better. We had a pretty decent team then, but his play waas only mediocre at best. We continued to improve, and his mediocre play continued. We were at our best last season, but didn't get a chance to see him play.

I've said before, I hope he's grown, I'd love to give him one last shot, but I'm not holding my breath and won't be shocked if it doesn't work.
As I told Caine in another post, if he doesn't show improvement this year, I will be ready to throw him under the bus (again) just like I have done for all of the players I feel aren't cutting it.

It just so happens that I can't help but believe that most of our opinions are based on a dislike of a player who didn't perform up to our standards.

Maybe, just maybe, we were setting to high of a set of standards for him especially when you look at his supporting cast, is all I'm saying.

I don't have a dislike for the guy. I have severe doubts about his ability.

Its not a hatred for the guy like the one your and Favre share.

I just do not believe that Jackson is ready to lead us to the success we've had.

Marrdro
05-06-2010, 11:43 AM
i_bleed_purple wrote:

Marrdro wrote:

i_bleed_purple wrote:

Marrdro wrote:

i_bleed_purple wrote:

Marrdro wrote:

i_bleed_purple wrote:

Marrdro wrote:

Caine wrote:

Marrdro wrote:

Caine wrote:

Marrdro wrote:

Caine wrote:

Marrdro wrote:

Caine wrote:

Jackson has all the PHYSICAL tools to succeed...but he's never demonstrated the mental ability nor the heart to pull one out of the fire (with ONE exception).

Caine
But therein lies the rub doens't it.

Look around the league. The young QB's that have succeeded have had teams around them that could carry them and no one has asked them to carry anything.

Again, for me atleast, your cut on this is that you expect something out of him, mostly tied to a few comments from our HC saying he was ready. A couple of us don't quite see it that way.

Could we be cutting him some slack? Possibly, but again, shouldn't we cut young kids, forced to play before they are ready, some slack?

C'mon, Marr...isn't that a bit of a stretch too? Why do you make it so easy?

Are you trying to tell me that Flacco had a good team around him? He plays in BALTIMORE...where Receivers go to DIE. Now, have they made a concerted effort to improve at that position? This year they did...but Flacco was battling his ass off with not much around him before now.

Sanchez at the Jets isn't surrounded by awesome receivers. Schaub in Houston doesn't have much pro-bowl talent around him. And so on, and so on...

Jackson had a bad receiver corps in 06, a better one in 07, and an even better one in 08. And while the TEAM itself improved - along with Jacksons stats - Jackson himself never really seemed to much. Mostly, he rode other people's success.

Caine
2009
Ray Rice 6th in yards (1339).
Derrick Mason 25th, 73 recpetions/1,028 yards.
2008
Le'Ron McClain 902 yards from a FB
Willis McGahee 671 yards
Ray Rice BAL 454 yards
Derrick Mason 16th, 80 receptions/1,037 yards.
Doesn't sound like chop liver to me.

Yes, Marr...and two of those are Backs, not receivers...are they better than Adrian/Chester? No? Than my point stands. Jackson has had EVERY opportunity to succeed, and simply hasn't. Not on his OWN merits...only on someone elses.

Caine
And I agree to a point and that is my point. Teams should carry a young QB, not the other way around.

And those backs stats are rushing stats, not recieving.

And yet all of the "Successful" young QB's are NOT being "carried"...they are leading the charge. Something Jackson hasn't done.

Jackson is a cookie cutter QB. We can drop almost anyone in there and get the same results.

Caine
Sanchez threw 12 TD's to 20 INT's. That is hardly "Leading the charge" my friend.

Ryan was asked to to more last year, with very little success and that was even after they added arguably the best TE in the league.

and an injured runningback
You just made my point for me. Without the RB he wasn't as productive, even with the addition of the new TE.

Again, good teams can carry a QB, a young QB cannot carry a team (in most instances).

that is no point. That will be the case with any team. If AD goes down and teams start playing the pass, I bet Favre's nubmers go down too. If Chris Johnson gets hurt, I bet Vince Young puts up 30 interceptions. Brandon Jacobs was off this year, and Eli didn't have a great season either.

Marvin Harrison got hurt, and Peyton's stats suffered. It happens on EVERY SINGLE TEAM.

Add a TE, take away a run game and let the D Focus on the pass... hmm... wonder what will happen?

When Turner was healthy, he was still putting up great numbers, and since teams wer eplaying the Run, So did Ryan.

Look at a couple examples:
Week 2: Car, Turner: 105 yds, Ryan: 220 yds, 3 TD's

Week 8: NO Loss, Turner: 151 yds, Ryan, 289 yds, but 3 ints

Week 9: Was Win, 166 yds, Ryan: 70%, 135 yds.

Towards the end of the season, sans Turner, Ryan also didn't do as well, because teams didn't have to focus on Turner

Turner put up a 4.9 yard average with 10 tds in 10 games running straight up the gut. That would help Ryan, that would help Favre, that would help Brady and Manning.
Sounds like your point is that it is a team effort and without all the pieces clicking, even the great ones (not to mention a 1-AA QB from a running school) will struggle at times.

Again, thats the point I'm trying to make.

Yes, it is a team sport, and we need all parts to click. Some QB's are capable of making up for shortcomings of other players. TJ has not been able to do that. We had crap receivers when he came into the league, and his performance was nothing short of pure crap. We improved the next year, and his performance got better. We had a pretty decent team then, but his play waas only mediocre at best. We continued to improve, and his mediocre play continued. We were at our best last season, but didn't get a chance to see him play.

I've said before, I hope he's grown, I'd love to give him one last shot, but I'm not holding my breath and won't be shocked if it doesn't work.
As I told Caine in another post, if he doesn't show improvement this year, I will be ready to throw him under the bus (again) just like I have done for all of the players I feel aren't cutting it.

It just so happens that I can't help but believe that most of our opinions are based on a dislike of a player who didn't perform up to our standards.

Maybe, just maybe, we were setting to high of a set of standards for him especially when you look at his supporting cast, is all I'm saying.

I don't have a dislike for the guy. I have severe doubts about his ability.

Its not a hatred for the guy like the one your and Favre share.

I just do not believe that Jackson is ready to lead us to the success we've had.
Two things......

I don't hate anyone. Especially not a football player who entertains me while he is playing a game.

Its OK if you don't believe. I can understand that as I have waivered on him before. It just so happens that this year I am a believer.

i_bleed_purple
05-06-2010, 11:50 AM
Marrdro wrote:

i_bleed_purple wrote:

Marrdro wrote:

i_bleed_purple wrote:

Marrdro wrote:

i_bleed_purple wrote:

Marrdro wrote:

i_bleed_purple wrote:

Marrdro wrote:

Caine wrote:

Marrdro wrote:

Caine wrote:

Marrdro wrote:

Caine wrote:

Marrdro wrote:

Caine wrote:

Jackson has all the PHYSICAL tools to succeed...but he's never demonstrated the mental ability nor the heart to pull one out of the fire (with ONE exception).

Caine
But therein lies the rub doens't it.

Look around the league. The young QB's that have succeeded have had teams around them that could carry them and no one has asked them to carry anything.

Again, for me atleast, your cut on this is that you expect something out of him, mostly tied to a few comments from our HC saying he was ready. A couple of us don't quite see it that way.

Could we be cutting him some slack? Possibly, but again, shouldn't we cut young kids, forced to play before they are ready, some slack?

C'mon, Marr...isn't that a bit of a stretch too? Why do you make it so easy?

Are you trying to tell me that Flacco had a good team around him? He plays in BALTIMORE...where Receivers go to DIE. Now, have they made a concerted effort to improve at that position? This year they did...but Flacco was battling his ass off with not much around him before now.

Sanchez at the Jets isn't surrounded by awesome receivers. Schaub in Houston doesn't have much pro-bowl talent around him. And so on, and so on...

Jackson had a bad receiver corps in 06, a better one in 07, and an even better one in 08. And while the TEAM itself improved - along with Jacksons stats - Jackson himself never really seemed to much. Mostly, he rode other people's success.

Caine
2009
Ray Rice 6th in yards (1339).
Derrick Mason 25th, 73 recpetions/1,028 yards.
2008
Le'Ron McClain 902 yards from a FB
Willis McGahee 671 yards
Ray Rice BAL 454 yards
Derrick Mason 16th, 80 receptions/1,037 yards.
Doesn't sound like chop liver to me.

Yes, Marr...and two of those are Backs, not receivers...are they better than Adrian/Chester? No? Than my point stands. Jackson has had EVERY opportunity to succeed, and simply hasn't. Not on his OWN merits...only on someone elses.

Caine
And I agree to a point and that is my point. Teams should carry a young QB, not the other way around.

And those backs stats are rushing stats, not recieving.

And yet all of the "Successful" young QB's are NOT being "carried"...they are leading the charge. Something Jackson hasn't done.

Jackson is a cookie cutter QB. We can drop almost anyone in there and get the same results.

Caine
Sanchez threw 12 TD's to 20 INT's. That is hardly "Leading the charge" my friend.

Ryan was asked to to more last year, with very little success and that was even after they added arguably the best TE in the league.

and an injured runningback
You just made my point for me. Without the RB he wasn't as productive, even with the addition of the new TE.

Again, good teams can carry a QB, a young QB cannot carry a team (in most instances).

that is no point. That will be the case with any team. If AD goes down and teams start playing the pass, I bet Favre's nubmers go down too. If Chris Johnson gets hurt, I bet Vince Young puts up 30 interceptions. Brandon Jacobs was off this year, and Eli didn't have a great season either.

Marvin Harrison got hurt, and Peyton's stats suffered. It happens on EVERY SINGLE TEAM.

Add a TE, take away a run game and let the D Focus on the pass... hmm... wonder what will happen?

When Turner was healthy, he was still putting up great numbers, and since teams wer eplaying the Run, So did Ryan.

Look at a couple examples:
Week 2: Car, Turner: 105 yds, Ryan: 220 yds, 3 TD's

Week 8: NO Loss, Turner: 151 yds, Ryan, 289 yds, but 3 ints

Week 9: Was Win, 166 yds, Ryan: 70%, 135 yds.

Towards the end of the season, sans Turner, Ryan also didn't do as well, because teams didn't have to focus on Turner

Turner put up a 4.9 yard average with 10 tds in 10 games running straight up the gut. That would help Ryan, that would help Favre, that would help Brady and Manning.
Sounds like your point is that it is a team effort and without all the pieces clicking, even the great ones (not to mention a 1-AA QB from a running school) will struggle at times.

Again, thats the point I'm trying to make.

Yes, it is a team sport, and we need all parts to click. Some QB's are capable of making up for shortcomings of other players. TJ has not been able to do that. We had crap receivers when he came into the league, and his performance was nothing short of pure crap. We improved the next year, and his performance got better. We had a pretty decent team then, but his play waas only mediocre at best. We continued to improve, and his mediocre play continued. We were at our best last season, but didn't get a chance to see him play.

I've said before, I hope he's grown, I'd love to give him one last shot, but I'm not holding my breath and won't be shocked if it doesn't work.
As I told Caine in another post, if he doesn't show improvement this year, I will be ready to throw him under the bus (again) just like I have done for all of the players I feel aren't cutting it.

It just so happens that I can't help but believe that most of our opinions are based on a dislike of a player who didn't perform up to our standards.

Maybe, just maybe, we were setting to high of a set of standards for him especially when you look at his supporting cast, is all I'm saying.

I don't have a dislike for the guy. I have severe doubts about his ability.

Its not a hatred for the guy like the one your and Favre share.

I just do not believe that Jackson is ready to lead us to the success we've had.
Two things......

I don't hate anyone. Especially not a football player who entertains me while he is playing a game.

Its OK if you don't believe. I can understand that as I have waivered on him before. It just so happens that this year I am a believer.

ah, my mistake. I don't have a "Severe Disdain" for TJ like the one you and Favre share.

He just hasn't convinced me.

I think/hope he'll be improved, and I hope he'll be our QB of the future. Seriously, i woudl not be happier if TJ proved to be a great QB in this league. His physical skills and mobility could be a huge asset for us if he could just play consistently at a high level.

Problem is, he hasn't done that yet, and I jsut don't know that he will.

AKViking
05-06-2010, 12:11 PM
If TJ learns visually, why was Sage the only one siting next to Favre looking at game polaroids ALL season? Was TJ pouting? Probably, even his aunty was asking why he looked so sad on the sidelines. His reply: "I'm just in my own little world." Whaaa!!! If you were up to par as a Qb they wouldn't have begged Brett to come out of retirement. So put up or shut up. Me thinks TJ just didn't like his role as padawan learner. There is no try young TJ, there is only do!

Marrdro
05-06-2010, 12:19 PM
AKViking wrote:

If TJ learns visually, why was Sage the only one siting next to Favre looking at game polaroids ALL season? Was TJ pouting? Probably, even his aunty was asking why he looked so sad on the sidelines. His reply: "I'm just in my own little world." Whaaa!!! If you were up to par as a Qb they wouldn't have begged Brett to come out of retirement. So put up or shut up. Me thinks TJ just didn't like his role as padawan learner. There is no try young TJ, there is only do!
Did you ever stop to consider that maybe it was a sign that he (TJ) understood what he was seeing from the sideline and maybe Sage didn't?

That is a bit more plausable than to sit here and think that a grown man would act like a little kid.

tarkenton10
05-06-2010, 12:30 PM
Marrdro wrote:

AKViking wrote:

If TJ learns visually, why was Sage the only one siting next to Favre looking at game polaroids ALL season? Was TJ pouting? Probably, even his aunty was asking why he looked so sad on the sidelines. His reply: "I'm just in my own little world." Whaaa!!! If you were up to par as a Qb they wouldn't have begged Brett to come out of retirement. So put up or shut up. Me thinks TJ just didn't like his role as padawan learner. There is no try young TJ, there is only do!
Did you ever stop to consider that maybe it was a sign that he (TJ) understood what he was seeing from the sideline and maybe Sage didn't?

That is a bit more plausable than to sit here and think that a grown man would act like a little kid.

Both are equally plausable since no one knows what the young man is/was thinking. I really don't care. If he has learned from Favre it will show if not it will show also; the proof is in the pudding. All this conjecture is just that no one knows how he will perform or even if he get the chance. All this debate could be for naught if we sign Dnab or if Sage starts.

AKViking
05-06-2010, 12:32 PM
Yup, sure did think about that. So if TJ knows all there is to know, why didn't anyone want him for the pittance the Vikings were asking? Lord knows no grown men have ever acted like babies when they THOUGHT they were wronged. ;)

C Mac D
05-06-2010, 12:34 PM
AKViking wrote:

Yup, sure did think about that. So if TJ knows all there is to know, why didn't anyone want him for the pittance the Vikings were asking? Lord knows no grown men have ever acted like babies when they THOUGHT they were wronged. ;)

Only one tendered RFA was sign across the entire NFL.

Marrdro
05-06-2010, 12:35 PM
AKViking wrote:

Yup, sure did think about that. So if TJ knows all there is to know, why didn't anyone want him for the pittance the Vikings were asking? Lord knows no grown men have ever acted like babies when they THOUGHT they were wronged. ;)
I don't consider men men when they act like children.

As to why didn't anyone want him? I am still convinced that the owners all got together and agreed that they wouldn't target other teams players.

Only way you can explain why very few (I think we found out 3 were actually signed) were signed away from teams that offered them tenders.

Marrdro
05-06-2010, 12:35 PM
C Mac D wrote:

AKViking wrote:

Yup, sure did think about that. So if TJ knows all there is to know, why didn't anyone want him for the pittance the Vikings were asking? Lord knows no grown men have ever acted like babies when they THOUGHT they were wronged. ;)

Only one tendered RFA was sign across the entire NFL.
Even worse, I thought we actually found 3 that day.

i_bleed_purple
05-06-2010, 12:36 PM
C Mac D wrote:

AKViking wrote:

Yup, sure did think about that. So if TJ knows all there is to know, why didn't anyone want him for the pittance the Vikings were asking? Lord knows no grown men have ever acted like babies when they THOUGHT they were wronged. ;)

Only one tendered RFA was sign across the entire NFL.

fact remains teams didn't think he was worth a second round pick.

Its essentially a trade, they give a second ,they get TJ. Nobody though it was worth it.

thats what teams who sign their RFA's try do do, put a tender that other teams wont want to pay. Nobody wanted to pay a 2nd for TJ.

tarkenton10
05-06-2010, 12:36 PM
Marrdro wrote:

AKViking wrote:

If TJ learns visually, why was Sage the only one siting next to Favre looking at game polaroids ALL season? Was TJ pouting? Probably, even his aunty was asking why he looked so sad on the sidelines. His reply: "I'm just in my own little world." Whaaa!!! If you were up to par as a Qb they wouldn't have begged Brett to come out of retirement. So put up or shut up. Me thinks TJ just didn't like his role as padawan learner. There is no try young TJ, there is only do!
Did you ever stop to consider that maybe it was a sign that he (TJ) understood what he was seeing from the sideline and maybe Sage didn't?

That is a bit more plausable than to sit here and think that a grown man would act like a little kid.

I find that second sentence to be assuming quite a bit. I have known several men & women (wouldn't want anyone to think I am being sexist; I am already accused of being racist)that act worse than little children. I would not put it past a twenty something year old man who thinks he should start to sulk. There are many instances you can find where it has happened in the NFL before by older players than TJ.

Marrdro
05-06-2010, 12:37 PM
tarkenton10 wrote:

Marrdro wrote:

AKViking wrote:

If TJ learns visually, why was Sage the only one siting next to Favre looking at game polaroids ALL season? Was TJ pouting? Probably, even his aunty was asking why he looked so sad on the sidelines. His reply: "I'm just in my own little world." Whaaa!!! If you were up to par as a Qb they wouldn't have begged Brett to come out of retirement. So put up or shut up. Me thinks TJ just didn't like his role as padawan learner. There is no try young TJ, there is only do!
Did you ever stop to consider that maybe it was a sign that he (TJ) understood what he was seeing from the sideline and maybe Sage didn't?

That is a bit more plausable than to sit here and think that a grown man would act like a little kid.

Both are equally plausable since no one knows what the young man is/was thinking. I really don't care. If he has learned from Favre it will show if not it will show also; the proof is in the pudding. All this conjecture is just that no one knows how he will perform or even if he get the chance. All this debate could be for naught if we sign Dnab or if Sage starts.
Excellent point.

Just as a ohhhhh by the way, even though I believe TJ is ready and I think the staff has confidence in him, if Dnabb shows up, TJ will be our back up for a long time to come.

C Mac D
05-06-2010, 12:37 PM
i_bleed_purple wrote:

C Mac D wrote:

AKViking wrote:

Yup, sure did think about that. So if TJ knows all there is to know, why didn't anyone want him for the pittance the Vikings were asking? Lord knows no grown men have ever acted like babies when they THOUGHT they were wronged. ;)

Only one tendered RFA was sign across the entire NFL.

fact remains teams didn't think he was worth a second round pick.

Its essentially a trade, they give a second ,they get TJ. Nobody though it was worth it.

thats what teams who sign their RFA's try do do, put a tender that other teams wont want to pay. Nobody wanted to pay a 2nd for TJ.

I think there's a bit more too it than that... not quite that simple.

Marrdro
05-06-2010, 12:39 PM
i_bleed_purple wrote:

C Mac D wrote:

AKViking wrote:

Yup, sure did think about that. So if TJ knows all there is to know, why didn't anyone want him for the pittance the Vikings were asking? Lord knows no grown men have ever acted like babies when they THOUGHT they were wronged. ;)

Only one tendered RFA was sign across the entire NFL.

fact remains teams didn't think he was worth a second round pick.

Its essentially a trade, they give a second ,they get TJ. Nobody though it was worth it.

thats what teams who sign their RFA's try do do, put a tender that other teams wont want to pay. Nobody wanted to pay a 2nd for TJ.
Same can be said for 3-4 teams in dire need of a DE, that didn't go after Dumervill.

Although, on the surface, it is a good discussion point to try to convince me, when one looks at it and sees all the talent that was out there available, that could make teams better and we only had 1 RFA signed, something smells a bit fishy to me.

C Mac D
05-06-2010, 12:44 PM
Marrdro wrote:

C Mac D wrote:

AKViking wrote:

Yup, sure did think about that. So if TJ knows all there is to know, why didn't anyone want him for the pittance the Vikings were asking? Lord knows no grown men have ever acted like babies when they THOUGHT they were wronged. ;)

Only one tendered RFA was sign across the entire NFL.
Even worse, I thought we actually found 3 that day.

Those were only LB'ers and none of them were tendered.

i_bleed_purple
05-06-2010, 12:45 PM
Marrdro wrote:

i_bleed_purple wrote:

C Mac D wrote:

AKViking wrote:

Yup, sure did think about that. So if TJ knows all there is to know, why didn't anyone want him for the pittance the Vikings were asking? Lord knows no grown men have ever acted like babies when they THOUGHT they were wronged. ;)

Only one tendered RFA was sign across the entire NFL.

fact remains teams didn't think he was worth a second round pick.

Its essentially a trade, they give a second ,they get TJ. Nobody though it was worth it.

thats what teams who sign their RFA's try do do, put a tender that other teams wont want to pay. Nobody wanted to pay a 2nd for TJ.
Same can be said for 3-4 teams in dire need of a DE, that didn't go after Dumervill.

Although, on the surface, it is a good discussion point to try to convince me, when one looks at it and sees all the talent that was out there available, that could make teams better and we only had 1 RFA signed, something smells a bit fishy to me.

question: How many trades were done? (not including draft day pick for pick trades)

Not alot. Draft day usually has a few more player and pick for pick trades, but thats usually when the bulk of them are.

The rest of the time, there aren't many trades, which is essentially what signing aa RFA is, a trade. Only difference is, you have the player on a 1 year contract, which he has no obligation to extend.

C Mac D
05-06-2010, 12:50 PM
i_bleed_purple wrote:

Marrdro wrote:

i_bleed_purple wrote:

C Mac D wrote:

AKViking wrote:

Yup, sure did think about that. So if TJ knows all there is to know, why didn't anyone want him for the pittance the Vikings were asking? Lord knows no grown men have ever acted like babies when they THOUGHT they were wronged. ;)

Only one tendered RFA was sign across the entire NFL.

fact remains teams didn't think he was worth a second round pick.

Its essentially a trade, they give a second ,they get TJ. Nobody though it was worth it.

thats what teams who sign their RFA's try do do, put a tender that other teams wont want to pay. Nobody wanted to pay a 2nd for TJ.
Same can be said for 3-4 teams in dire need of a DE, that didn't go after Dumervill.

Although, on the surface, it is a good discussion point to try to convince me, when one looks at it and sees all the talent that was out there available, that could make teams better and we only had 1 RFA signed, something smells a bit fishy to me.

question: How many trades were done? (not including draft day pick for pick trades)

Not alot. Draft day usually has a few more player and pick for pick trades, but thats usually when the bulk of them are.

The rest of the time, there aren't many trades, which is essentially what signing aa RFA is, a trade. Only difference is, you have the player on a 1 year contract, which he has no obligation to extend.

Not alot of trades?

Brandom Marshall? Arguably the best WR in football.

Anquon Boldin?

Julius Peppers?

Donovan McNabb?

Santonio Holmes?

Kerry Rhodes?

Antonio Cromartie?

i_bleed_purple
05-06-2010, 12:54 PM
C Mac D wrote:

i_bleed_purple wrote:

Marrdro wrote:

i_bleed_purple wrote:

C Mac D wrote:

AKViking wrote:

Yup, sure did think about that. So if TJ knows all there is to know, why didn't anyone want him for the pittance the Vikings were asking? Lord knows no grown men have ever acted like babies when they THOUGHT they were wronged. ;)

Only one tendered RFA was sign across the entire NFL.

fact remains teams didn't think he was worth a second round pick.

Its essentially a trade, they give a second ,they get TJ. Nobody though it was worth it.

thats what teams who sign their RFA's try do do, put a tender that other teams wont want to pay. Nobody wanted to pay a 2nd for TJ.
Same can be said for 3-4 teams in dire need of a DE, that didn't go after Dumervill.

Although, on the surface, it is a good discussion point to try to convince me, when one looks at it and sees all the talent that was out there available, that could make teams better and we only had 1 RFA signed, something smells a bit fishy to me.

question: How many trades were done? (not including draft day pick for pick trades)

Not alot. Draft day usually has a few more player and pick for pick trades, but thats usually when the bulk of them are.

The rest of the time, there aren't many trades, which is essentially what signing aa RFA is, a trade. Only difference is, you have the player on a 1 year contract, which he has no obligation to extend.

Not alot of trades?

Brandom Marshall? Arguably the best WR in football.

Anquon Boldin?

Julius Peppers?

Donovan McNabb?

Santonio Holmes?

Kerry Rhodes?

Antonio Cromartie?

so Holmes: had troulbes and was unloaded to the first offer of a 5th rounder
Boldin: 3rd and 4th rounder (about even or less than we'd get for Jackson)
McNabb: 2nd and 3rd/4th (for a proven QB better than TJ?)
Rhodes: 4th round pick
Cromartie: 3rd round pick.

So all but McNabb were traded for less than we'd get for Jackson. Former and current star players for very little.

RFA is an expensive trade. Teams don't want to lose their guy, so charge high picks.

C Mac D
05-06-2010, 12:58 PM
i_bleed_purple wrote:

C Mac D wrote:

i_bleed_purple wrote:

Marrdro wrote:

i_bleed_purple wrote:

C Mac D wrote:

AKViking wrote:

Yup, sure did think about that. So if TJ knows all there is to know, why didn't anyone want him for the pittance the Vikings were asking? Lord knows no grown men have ever acted like babies when they THOUGHT they were wronged. ;)

Only one tendered RFA was sign across the entire NFL.

fact remains teams didn't think he was worth a second round pick.

Its essentially a trade, they give a second ,they get TJ. Nobody though it was worth it.

thats what teams who sign their RFA's try do do, put a tender that other teams wont want to pay. Nobody wanted to pay a 2nd for TJ.
Same can be said for 3-4 teams in dire need of a DE, that didn't go after Dumervill.

Although, on the surface, it is a good discussion point to try to convince me, when one looks at it and sees all the talent that was out there available, that could make teams better and we only had 1 RFA signed, something smells a bit fishy to me.

question: How many trades were done? (not including draft day pick for pick trades)

Not alot. Draft day usually has a few more player and pick for pick trades, but thats usually when the bulk of them are.

The rest of the time, there aren't many trades, which is essentially what signing aa RFA is, a trade. Only difference is, you have the player on a 1 year contract, which he has no obligation to extend.

Not alot of trades?

Brandom Marshall? Arguably the best WR in football.

Anquon Boldin?

Julius Peppers?

Donovan McNabb?

Santonio Holmes?

Kerry Rhodes?

Antonio Cromartie?

so Holmes: had troulbes and was unloaded to the first offer of a 5th rounder
Boldin: 3rd and 4th rounder (about even or less than we'd get for Jackson)
McNabb: 2nd and 3rd/4th (for a proven QB better than TJ?)
Rhodes: 4th round pick
Cromartie: 3rd round pick.

So all but McNabb were traded for less than we'd get for Jackson. Former and current star players for very little.

RFA is an expensive trade. Teams don't want to lose their guy, so charge high picks.

Perhaps he was tendered that high so no one would take him?

Hmmm... interesting.

i_bleed_purple
05-06-2010, 01:01 PM
C Mac D wrote:

i_bleed_purple wrote:

C Mac D wrote:

i_bleed_purple wrote:

Marrdro wrote:

i_bleed_purple wrote:

C Mac D wrote:

AKViking wrote:

Yup, sure did think about that. So if TJ knows all there is to know, why didn't anyone want him for the pittance the Vikings were asking? Lord knows no grown men have ever acted like babies when they THOUGHT they were wronged. ;)

Only one tendered RFA was sign across the entire NFL.

fact remains teams didn't think he was worth a second round pick.

Its essentially a trade, they give a second ,they get TJ. Nobody though it was worth it.

thats what teams who sign their RFA's try do do, put a tender that other teams wont want to pay. Nobody wanted to pay a 2nd for TJ.
Same can be said for 3-4 teams in dire need of a DE, that didn't go after Dumervill.

Although, on the surface, it is a good discussion point to try to convince me, when one looks at it and sees all the talent that was out there available, that could make teams better and we only had 1 RFA signed, something smells a bit fishy to me.

question: How many trades were done? (not including draft day pick for pick trades)

Not alot. Draft day usually has a few more player and pick for pick trades, but thats usually when the bulk of them are.

The rest of the time, there aren't many trades, which is essentially what signing aa RFA is, a trade. Only difference is, you have the player on a 1 year contract, which he has no obligation to extend.

Not alot of trades?

Brandom Marshall? Arguably the best WR in football.

Anquon Boldin?

Julius Peppers?

Donovan McNabb?

Santonio Holmes?

Kerry Rhodes?

Antonio Cromartie?

so Holmes: had troulbes and was unloaded to the first offer of a 5th rounder
Boldin: 3rd and 4th rounder (about even or less than we'd get for Jackson)
McNabb: 2nd and 3rd/4th (for a proven QB better than TJ?)
Rhodes: 4th round pick
Cromartie: 3rd round pick.

So all but McNabb were traded for less than we'd get for Jackson. Former and current star players for very little.

RFA is an expensive trade. Teams don't want to lose their guy, so charge high picks.

Perhaps he was tendered that high so no one would take him?

Hmmm... interesting.

Thats what I'm getting at.

Vikings tendered him as a 2nd. Nobody wanted to give up a second for him, because they don't think he's worth it.

I doubt the VIkings would give up a second for him if some other team was tendering him instead.

C Mac D
05-06-2010, 01:04 PM
i_bleed_purple wrote:

Thats what I'm getting at.

Vikings tendered him as a 2nd. Nobody wanted to give up a second for him, because they don't think he's worth it.

I doubt the VIkings would give up a second for him if some other team was tendering him instead.

I can agree with that, but I don't think it means he's not good or teams weren't interested... I just think it means a 2nd round pick is really steep. It's pretty much what McNabb went for.

i_bleed_purple
05-06-2010, 01:08 PM
C Mac D wrote:

i_bleed_purple wrote:

Thats what I'm getting at.

Vikings tendered him as a 2nd. Nobody wanted to give up a second for him, because they don't think he's worth it.

I doubt the VIkings would give up a second for him if some other team was tendering him instead.

I can agree with that, but I don't think it means he's not good or teams weren't interested... I just think it means a 2nd round pick is really steep. It's pretty much what McNabb went for.

I'd agree with that.

What do you think we'd get for a trade? 4th? if we're lucky, probably a 5th or worse.

I think he's worth more to us as a backup than what we'd get for him, but he's not worth enough that other teams would trade anything of value for him.

Caine
05-06-2010, 01:15 PM
i_bleed_purple wrote:

C Mac D wrote:

i_bleed_purple wrote:

C Mac D wrote:

i_bleed_purple wrote:

Marrdro wrote:

i_bleed_purple wrote:

C Mac D wrote:

AKViking wrote:

Yup, sure did think about that. So if TJ knows all there is to know, why didn't anyone want him for the pittance the Vikings were asking? Lord knows no grown men have ever acted like babies when they THOUGHT they were wronged. ;)

Only one tendered RFA was sign across the entire NFL.

fact remains teams didn't think he was worth a second round pick.

Its essentially a trade, they give a second ,they get TJ. Nobody though it was worth it.

thats what teams who sign their RFA's try do do, put a tender that other teams wont want to pay. Nobody wanted to pay a 2nd for TJ.
Same can be said for 3-4 teams in dire need of a DE, that didn't go after Dumervill.

Although, on the surface, it is a good discussion point to try to convince me, when one looks at it and sees all the talent that was out there available, that could make teams better and we only had 1 RFA signed, something smells a bit fishy to me.

question: How many trades were done? (not including draft day pick for pick trades)

Not alot. Draft day usually has a few more player and pick for pick trades, but thats usually when the bulk of them are.

The rest of the time, there aren't many trades, which is essentially what signing aa RFA is, a trade. Only difference is, you have the player on a 1 year contract, which he has no obligation to extend.

Not alot of trades?

Brandom Marshall? Arguably the best WR in football.

Anquon Boldin?

Julius Peppers?

Donovan McNabb?

Santonio Holmes?

Kerry Rhodes?

Antonio Cromartie?

so Holmes: had troulbes and was unloaded to the first offer of a 5th rounder
Boldin: 3rd and 4th rounder (about even or less than we'd get for Jackson)
McNabb: 2nd and 3rd/4th (for a proven QB better than TJ?)
Rhodes: 4th round pick
Cromartie: 3rd round pick.

So all but McNabb were traded for less than we'd get for Jackson. Former and current star players for very little.

RFA is an expensive trade. Teams don't want to lose their guy, so charge high picks.

Perhaps he was tendered that high so no one would take him?

Hmmm... interesting.

Thats what I'm getting at.

Vikings tendered him as a 2nd. Nobody wanted to give up a second for him, because they don't think he's worth it.

I doubt the VIkings would give up a second for him if some other team was tendering him instead.

I thought he was tendered as a 3rd...not a 2nd.

Just sayin'

Caine

i_bleed_purple
05-06-2010, 01:19 PM
my mistake

he was originally an original-round tender, but it was dropped to a 3rd round tender when the VIkes used their 2nd round tender on Fred Evans

C Mac D
05-06-2010, 01:27 PM
i_bleed_purple wrote:

my mistake

he was originally an original-round tender, but it was dropped to a 3rd round tender when the VIkes used their 2nd round tender on Fred Evans

In that case my theory is shot. Jackson sucks.

i_bleed_purple
05-06-2010, 01:33 PM
C Mac D wrote:

i_bleed_purple wrote:

my mistake

he was originally an original-round tender, but it was dropped to a 3rd round tender when the VIkes used their 2nd round tender on Fred Evans

In that case my theory is shot. Jackson sucks.

lol

out tendered by Fred Evans... that must hurt the self-confidence

mountainviking
05-06-2010, 02:02 PM
Yes, the QB is important, but it is still, a TEAM game. The best offense in the world can be useless if your defense never stops anybody. Even the greats, Montana, Young, Elway, Peyton, all had all-star casts around them! Can there be any denying that Rice, Craig, TO etc was one hell of an arsenal!? And, that Walsh's system was revolutionary at the time. Think that makes the QB look any better?

Remember Duh!Knee's offense with Moss, Carter, Reed, and Robert SMith? Didn't matter who the QB was, cuz even Jeff George looked good and threw for over 4000 yards!!

What the QB accomplishes on any given play has more to do with the total output of the other ten guys on the field than with whatever skillz he might have, or decisions he makes.

The Vikings are better as a team, not just because of who the QB was last year. Comparing what/who the Vikes were in the first two years of the new system, to what they are now, and were last year, is comparing apples to assholes.
Rice now > the young, oft-injured Rice
Harvin (our third guy now) > Bobby Wade who led the team in recpts 2 years in a row.
Loadholt > Cook
AP + TG > CT + MM
Jared Allen > A long, long list of draft picks that didn't pan out!
Even the Chiller's playcalling, challenges, clock management etc have improved since year 1. The, "system," is in place, and understood, by a nearly 100% returning starters crew.

I expect us to be competitive and successful with any of the 3 QBs from last year starting because of the TEAM around them. I by no means would "bet the farm," that Jackson's career will be legendary, but I don't feel most have given him the benefit of the doubt he deserves for the progress he's made, athletic potential he's flashed, work he's put in, and what he's been able to accomplish given the circumstances (rebuilding/new scheme/rookie from a small school) etc he's had to deal with.

In the past 2 years of limited duty TJack has completed 60% of his passes for an impressive 7.4 yards/attempt average (Favre's career is 7.1) and an excellent 10 TDs to Only 2 INTs ratio!! To that add the 2 first downs he gets with his feet most games, and the improvement of the team around him, and I see no reason why not to give him another shot at being the no.1! :) :woohoo: ;)



OK, thats my rant. Let the "apologist," namecalling and general random bashing continue... :P

Prophet
05-06-2010, 03:04 PM
mountainviking wrote:

...OK, thats my rant. Let the "apologist," namecalling and general random bashing continue... :P

lmao

Caine
05-06-2010, 03:49 PM
mountainviking wrote:


In the past 2 years of limited duty TJack has completed 60% of his passes for an impressive 7.4 yards/attempt average (Favre's career is 7.1) and an excellent 10 TDs to Only 2 INTs ratio!! To that add the 2 first downs he gets with his feet most games, and the improvement of the team around him, and I see no reason why not to give him another shot at being the no.1!

Again, as has been pointed out, that is based upon stats in a vacuum. What actually occured during those games, and the manner in which his stats were garnered is what concerns many of us, especially me. He has been purely the product of the system, not the gear that makes it go. As such, he is easily replaced by almost anyone with even a small amount of talent (And he WAS replaced, for almost an entire season, by an aged Gus Frerotte).

This is in direct comparrison to what happens when someone with a lot of talent shows up to drive the bus...and the Offense takes off.

There is no doubt that the "team around him" has improved...the question is whether or not Jackson has improved
at the same rate, or at an "acceptable" rate. To me, he simply hasn't.

Caine

marshallvike
05-06-2010, 05:27 PM
Caine wrote:

mountainviking wrote:
[quote]
He has been purely the product of the system,
Caine


Or........one could say he's been a victim of the system.

C Mac D
05-06-2010, 05:38 PM
marshallvike wrote:

Caine wrote:

mountainviking wrote:
[quote]
He has been purely the product of the system,
Caine


Or........one could say he's been a victim of the system.

Far too open minded for Caine.

C Mac D
05-06-2010, 05:45 PM
Caine wrote:

mountainviking wrote:


In the past 2 years of limited duty TJack has completed 60% of his passes for an impressive 7.4 yards/attempt average (Favre's career is 7.1) and an excellent 10 TDs to Only 2 INTs ratio!! To that add the 2 first downs he gets with his feet most games, and the improvement of the team around him, and I see no reason why not to give him another shot at being the no.1!

Again, as has been pointed out, that is based upon stats in a vacuum. What actually occured during those games, and the manner in which his stats were garnered is what concerns many of us, especially me. He has been purely the product of the system, not the gear that makes it go. As such, he is easily replaced by almost anyone with even a small amount of talent (And he WAS replaced, for almost an entire season, by an aged Gus Frerotte).

This is in direct comparrison to what happens when someone with a lot of talent shows up to drive the bus...and the Offense takes off.

There is no doubt that the "team around him" has improved...the question is whether or not Jackson has improved
at the same rate, or at an "acceptable" rate. To me, he simply hasn't.

Caine

And then Frerotte was replaced... when Gus was healthy, Jackson continued being the starter.

Anyways, please continue to dispute facts with clouded opinions. Just wanted to add that tid-bit in there.

singersp
05-06-2010, 07:19 PM
Caine wrote:

mountainviking wrote:


In the past 2 years of limited duty TJack has completed 60% of his passes for an impressive 7.4 yards/attempt average (Favre's career is 7.1) and an excellent 10 TDs to Only 2 INTs ratio!! To that add the 2 first downs he gets with his feet most games, and the improvement of the team around him, and I see no reason why not to give him another shot at being the no.1!

Again, as has been pointed out, that is based upon stats in a vacuum. What actually occured during those games, and the manner in which his stats were garnered is what concerns many of us, especially me. He has been purely the product of the system, not the gear that makes it go. As such, he is easily replaced by almost anyone with even a small amount of talent (And he WAS replaced, for almost an entire season, by an aged Gus Frerotte).

This is in direct comparrison to what happens when someone with a lot of talent shows up to drive the bus...and the Offense takes off.

There is no doubt that the "team around him" has improved...the question is whether or not Jackson has improved
at the same rate, or at an "acceptable" rate. To me, he simply hasn't.

Caine

LOL! How do you know how much he has or hasn't improved? Last I checked Favre started every game last year.

If you're going to base your perception of how much he didn't improved based on the mop up duty he did after Favre left the game & we had a win in hand, I'll LOL again.

Purple Floyd
05-06-2010, 07:24 PM
i_bleed_purple wrote:

Marrdro wrote:

i_bleed_purple wrote:

Marrdro wrote:

i_bleed_purple wrote:

Marrdro wrote:

i_bleed_purple wrote:

Marrdro wrote:

Caine wrote:

Marrdro wrote:

Caine wrote:

Marrdro wrote:

Caine wrote:

Marrdro wrote:

Caine wrote:

Jackson has all the PHYSICAL tools to succeed...but he's never demonstrated the mental ability nor the heart to pull one out of the fire (with ONE exception).

Caine
But therein lies the rub doens't it.

Look around the league. The young QB's that have succeeded have had teams around them that could carry them and no one has asked them to carry anything.

Again, for me atleast, your cut on this is that you expect something out of him, mostly tied to a few comments from our HC saying he was ready. A couple of us don't quite see it that way.

Could we be cutting him some slack? Possibly, but again, shouldn't we cut young kids, forced to play before they are ready, some slack?

C'mon, Marr...isn't that a bit of a stretch too? Why do you make it so easy?

Are you trying to tell me that Flacco had a good team around him? He plays in BALTIMORE...where Receivers go to DIE. Now, have they made a concerted effort to improve at that position? This year they did...but Flacco was battling his ass off with not much around him before now.

Sanchez at the Jets isn't surrounded by awesome receivers. Schaub in Houston doesn't have much pro-bowl talent around him. And so on, and so on...

Jackson had a bad receiver corps in 06, a better one in 07, and an even better one in 08. And while the TEAM itself improved - along with Jacksons stats - Jackson himself never really seemed to much. Mostly, he rode other people's success.

Caine
2009
Ray Rice 6th in yards (1339).
Derrick Mason 25th, 73 recpetions/1,028 yards.
2008
Le'Ron McClain 902 yards from a FB
Willis McGahee 671 yards
Ray Rice BAL 454 yards
Derrick Mason 16th, 80 receptions/1,037 yards.
Doesn't sound like chop liver to me.

Yes, Marr...and two of those are Backs, not receivers...are they better than Adrian/Chester? No? Than my point stands. Jackson has had EVERY opportunity to succeed, and simply hasn't. Not on his OWN merits...only on someone elses.

Caine
And I agree to a point and that is my point. Teams should carry a young QB, not the other way around.

And those backs stats are rushing stats, not recieving.

And yet all of the "Successful" young QB's are NOT being "carried"...they are leading the charge. Something Jackson hasn't done.

Jackson is a cookie cutter QB. We can drop almost anyone in there and get the same results.

Caine
Sanchez threw 12 TD's to 20 INT's. That is hardly "Leading the charge" my friend.

Ryan was asked to to more last year, with very little success and that was even after they added arguably the best TE in the league.

and an injured runningback
You just made my point for me. Without the RB he wasn't as productive, even with the addition of the new TE.

Again, good teams can carry a QB, a young QB cannot carry a team (in most instances).

that is no point. That will be the case with any team. If AD goes down and teams start playing the pass, I bet Favre's nubmers go down too. If Chris Johnson gets hurt, I bet Vince Young puts up 30 interceptions. Brandon Jacobs was off this year, and Eli didn't have a great season either.

Marvin Harrison got hurt, and Peyton's stats suffered. It happens on EVERY SINGLE TEAM.

Add a TE, take away a run game and let the D Focus on the pass... hmm... wonder what will happen?

When Turner was healthy, he was still putting up great numbers, and since teams wer eplaying the Run, So did Ryan.

Look at a couple examples:
Week 2: Car, Turner: 105 yds, Ryan: 220 yds, 3 TD's

Week 8: NO Loss, Turner: 151 yds, Ryan, 289 yds, but 3 ints

Week 9: Was Win, 166 yds, Ryan: 70%, 135 yds.

Towards the end of the season, sans Turner, Ryan also didn't do as well, because teams didn't have to focus on Turner

Turner put up a 4.9 yard average with 10 tds in 10 games running straight up the gut. That would help Ryan, that would help Favre, that would help Brady and Manning.
Sounds like your point is that it is a team effort and without all the pieces clicking, even the great ones (not to mention a 1-AA QB from a running school) will struggle at times.

Again, thats the point I'm trying to make.

Yes, it is a team sport, and we need all parts to click. Some QB's are capable of making up for shortcomings of other players. TJ has not been able to do that. We had crap receivers when he came into the league, and his performance was nothing short of pure crap. We improved the next year, and his performance got better. We had a pretty decent team then, but his play waas only mediocre at best. We continued to improve, and his mediocre play continued. We were at our best last season, but didn't get a chance to see him play.

I've said before, I hope he's grown, I'd love to give him one last shot, but I'm not holding my breath and won't be shocked if it doesn't work.
As I told Caine in another post, if he doesn't show improvement this year, I will be ready to throw him under the bus (again) just like I have done for all of the players I feel aren't cutting it.

It just so happens that I can't help but believe that most of our opinions are based on a dislike of a player who didn't perform up to our standards.

Maybe, just maybe, we were setting to high of a set of standards for him especially when you look at his supporting cast, is all I'm saying.

I don't have a dislike for the guy. I have severe doubts about his ability.

Its not a hatred for the guy like the one your and Favre share.

I just do not believe that Jackson is ready to lead us to the success we've had.

Amen.

Caine
05-06-2010, 08:20 PM
C Mac D wrote:

Caine wrote:

mountainviking wrote:


In the past 2 years of limited duty TJack has completed 60% of his passes for an impressive 7.4 yards/attempt average (Favre's career is 7.1) and an excellent 10 TDs to Only 2 INTs ratio!! To that add the 2 first downs he gets with his feet most games, and the improvement of the team around him, and I see no reason why not to give him another shot at being the no.1!

Again, as has been pointed out, that is based upon stats in a vacuum. What actually occured during those games, and the manner in which his stats were garnered is what concerns many of us, especially me. He has been purely the product of the system, not the gear that makes it go. As such, he is easily replaced by almost anyone with even a small amount of talent (And he WAS replaced, for almost an entire season, by an aged Gus Frerotte).

This is in direct comparrison to what happens when someone with a lot of talent shows up to drive the bus...and the Offense takes off.

There is no doubt that the "team around him" has improved...the question is whether or not Jackson has improved
at the same rate, or at an "acceptable" rate. To me, he simply hasn't.

Caine

And then Frerotte was replaced... when Gus was healthy, Jackson continued being the starter.

Anyways, please continue to dispute facts with clouded opinions. Just wanted to add that tid-bit in there.

Which is why I used the word "Almost" in the sentence...you really should learn to read yourself, because whomever is reading these posts to you is editing them...

Further, I ahve yet to see you interject anything BUT clouded opinion into this - or any - discussion...isn't that sort of your signature? As for facts...you wouoldn't know one if it came up to you and punched you in the nose.

Caine

Caine
05-06-2010, 08:24 PM
singersp wrote:

Caine wrote:

mountainviking wrote:


In the past 2 years of limited duty TJack has completed 60% of his passes for an impressive 7.4 yards/attempt average (Favre's career is 7.1) and an excellent 10 TDs to Only 2 INTs ratio!! To that add the 2 first downs he gets with his feet most games, and the improvement of the team around him, and I see no reason why not to give him another shot at being the no.1!

Again, as has been pointed out, that is based upon stats in a vacuum. What actually occured during those games, and the manner in which his stats were garnered is what concerns many of us, especially me. He has been purely the product of the system, not the gear that makes it go. As such, he is easily replaced by almost anyone with even a small amount of talent (And he WAS replaced, for almost an entire season, by an aged Gus Frerotte).

This is in direct comparrison to what happens when someone with a lot of talent shows up to drive the bus...and the Offense takes off.

There is no doubt that the "team around him" has improved...the question is whether or not Jackson has improved
at the same rate, or at an "acceptable" rate. To me, he simply hasn't.

Caine

LOL! How do you know how much he has or hasn't improved? Last I checked Favre started every game last year.

If you're going to base your perception of how much he didn't improved based on the mop up duty he did after Favre left the game & we had a win in hand, I'll LOL again.

My OPINION is based upon everything I have seen of him to date - that includes the peseason from last season. And, based upon his rate of improvement (again in my OPINION), in the games I have watched him play, I see vry little reason to believe th he has suddenly transformed into a starter...especilly considering how far aay he as when last we saw him, and the rate of improvement over the first 3 years.

And, of course, my unwavering OPINION has been VERY well documented, so when Jackson is the starter and is secure in the job, feel free to remind me just how wrong I was...

...much as I will remind you of how wrong you were about Favre.

Caine

marshallvike
05-06-2010, 09:18 PM
singersp wrote:

Caine wrote:

mountainviking wrote:


In the past 2 years of limited duty TJack has completed 60% of his passes for an impressive 7.4 yards/attempt average (Favre's career is 7.1) and an excellent 10 TDs to Only 2 INTs ratio!! To that add the 2 first downs he gets with his feet most games, and the improvement of the team around him, and I see no reason why not to give him another shot at being the no.1!

Again, as has been pointed out, that is based upon stats in a vacuum. What actually occured during those games, and the manner in which his stats were garnered is what concerns many of us, especially me. He has been purely the product of the system, not the gear that makes it go. As such, he is easily replaced by almost anyone with even a small amount of talent (And he WAS replaced, for almost an entire season, by an aged Gus Frerotte).

This is in direct comparrison to what happens when someone with a lot of talent shows up to drive the bus...and the Offense takes off.

There is no doubt that the "team around him" has improved...the question is whether or not Jackson has improved
at the same rate, or at an "acceptable" rate. To me, he simply hasn't.

Caine

LOL! How do you know how much he has or hasn't improved? Last I checked Favre started every game last year.

If you're going to base your perception of how much he didn't improved based on the mop up duty he did after Favre left the game & we had a win in hand, I'll LOL again.

singer, good to see you posting.

I'm a TJack guy though

i_bleed_purple
05-07-2010, 09:11 AM
marshallvike wrote:

singersp wrote:

Caine wrote:

mountainviking wrote:


In the past 2 years of limited duty TJack has completed 60% of his passes for an impressive 7.4 yards/attempt average (Favre's career is 7.1) and an excellent 10 TDs to Only 2 INTs ratio!! To that add the 2 first downs he gets with his feet most games, and the improvement of the team around him, and I see no reason why not to give him another shot at being the no.1!

Again, as has been pointed out, that is based upon stats in a vacuum. What actually occured during those games, and the manner in which his stats were garnered is what concerns many of us, especially me. He has been purely the product of the system, not the gear that makes it go. As such, he is easily replaced by almost anyone with even a small amount of talent (And he WAS replaced, for almost an entire season, by an aged Gus Frerotte).

This is in direct comparrison to what happens when someone with a lot of talent shows up to drive the bus...and the Offense takes off.

There is no doubt that the "team around him" has improved...the question is whether or not Jackson has improved
at the same rate, or at an "acceptable" rate. To me, he simply hasn't.

Caine

LOL! How do you know how much he has or hasn't improved? Last I checked Favre started every game last year.

If you're going to base your perception of how much he didn't improved based on the mop up duty he did after Favre left the game & we had a win in hand, I'll LOL again.

singer, good to see you posting.

I'm a TJack guy though

its a relapse... I tell you, this site is worse than crack.

tarkenton10
05-07-2010, 09:35 AM
singersp wrote:

Caine wrote:

mountainviking wrote:


In the past 2 years of limited duty TJack has completed 60% of his passes for an impressive 7.4 yards/attempt average (Favre's career is 7.1) and an excellent 10 TDs to Only 2 INTs ratio!! To that add the 2 first downs he gets with his feet most games, and the improvement of the team around him, and I see no reason why not to give him another shot at being the no.1!

Again, as has been pointed out, that is based upon stats in a vacuum. What actually occured during those games, and the manner in which his stats were garnered is what concerns many of us, especially me. He has been purely the product of the system, not the gear that makes it go. As such, he is easily replaced by almost anyone with even a small amount of talent (And he WAS replaced, for almost an entire season, by an aged Gus Frerotte).

This is in direct comparrison to what happens when someone with a lot of talent shows up to drive the bus...and the Offense takes off.

There is no doubt that the "team around him" has improved...the question is whether or not Jackson has improved
at the same rate, or at an "acceptable" rate. To me, he simply hasn't.

Caine

LOL! How do you know how much he has or hasn't improved? Last I checked Favre started every game last year.

If you're going to base your perception of how much he didn't improved based on the mop up duty he did after Favre left the game & we had a win in hand, I'll LOL again.

Tell that to CMac! Exactly what I said about his 110 rating and I was called a racist for that remark. Watch out you may get labeled.........oh wait you are defending TJ he won't label you. Nor will he see the hypocrisy in it. Opinions go both ways you have no idea how good TJ is just like you say no one knows how bad he is; this is all conjecture and wasted time. If they trot him out there we will see, I just hope if he stinks it up the TJ lovers will at least see his errors and not go into the blame game. Pride makes people defend the undefendable. If he does great, great for the Vikes!

marstc09
05-15-2010, 02:59 AM
Marrdro wrote:

jargomcfargo wrote:

Now it gets even worse for Jackson. He has to follow Favre.

Damn, I didn't think of that. Excellent point my friend.

In the end, the Noodle will still be pissing me off even after he leaves.

12 million well spent!

marstc09
05-15-2010, 03:05 AM
Marrdro wrote:

AKViking wrote:

If TJ learns visually, why was Sage the only one siting next to Favre looking at game polaroids ALL season? Was TJ pouting? Probably, even his aunty was asking why he looked so sad on the sidelines. His reply: "I'm just in my own little world." Whaaa!!! If you were up to par as a Qb they wouldn't have begged Brett to come out of retirement. So put up or shut up. Me thinks TJ just didn't like his role as padawan learner. There is no try young TJ, there is only do!
Did you ever stop to consider that maybe it was a sign that he (TJ) understood what he was seeing from the sideline and maybe Sage didn't?

That is a bit more plausable than to sit here and think that a grown man would act like a little kid.

LMFAO! That was a good one.
http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/deadspin/2009/08/tj1.jpg

marstc09
05-15-2010, 03:09 AM
i_bleed_purple wrote:

my mistake

he was originally an original-round tender, but it was dropped to a 3rd round tender when the VIkes used their 2nd round tender on Fred Evans

LOL so Evans was worth more than TJ. Suck on that Marrdro! LOL

marstc09
05-15-2010, 03:11 AM
singersp wrote:

Caine wrote:

mountainviking wrote:


In the past 2 years of limited duty TJack has completed 60% of his passes for an impressive 7.4 yards/attempt average (Favre's career is 7.1) and an excellent 10 TDs to Only 2 INTs ratio!! To that add the 2 first downs he gets with his feet most games, and the improvement of the team around him, and I see no reason why not to give him another shot at being the no.1!

Again, as has been pointed out, that is based upon stats in a vacuum. What actually occured during those games, and the manner in which his stats were garnered is what concerns many of us, especially me. He has been purely the product of the system, not the gear that makes it go. As such, he is easily replaced by almost anyone with even a small amount of talent (And he WAS replaced, for almost an entire season, by an aged Gus Frerotte).

This is in direct comparrison to what happens when someone with a lot of talent shows up to drive the bus...and the Offense takes off.

There is no doubt that the "team around him" has improved...the question is whether or not Jackson has improved
at the same rate, or at an "acceptable" rate. To me, he simply hasn't.

Caine

LOL! How do you know how much he has or hasn't improved? Last I checked Favre started every game last year.

If you're going to base your perception of how much he didn't improved based on the mop up duty he did after Favre left the game & we had a win in hand, I'll LOL again.

Interesting. Favre stated all the games. I wonder who said he would not?

Formo
05-15-2010, 03:34 AM
If we looked at Favre's more recent stats.. we would have concluded that he probably would have thrown for just as many INTs as TDs.. Possibly even more. He's aging, his arm is a big unknown (with surgery and all), and he's a statue. Oh, and he has shown to make really poor decisions. Every stat we would came up with could have shown us that he's basically done for prior to last season.

And what happened? The unthinkable. He came, he saw, he conquered all. Oh, and he ended up throwing a career low in INTs.. a stat that NO ONE had the cajones to predict.

My point? We are trying to base T-Jack's future by the bits of stats of his past. I know it's the trendy thing to do, and I know and agree that he hasn't shown much. But try to have an open mind if he comes in to play for us. It'll help you deal with the success our favorite NFL team will have despite your personal opinions on how you predicted T-Jack would play.

Me personally? Until he's shown he's absolutely NOT our guy (which will be when he's benched/released/etc.) I'm going to cheer my ass off for him just as hard as I cheer for the Pukers to get smoked week in and week out.

Purple Floyd
05-15-2010, 08:55 AM
Formo wrote:

If we looked at Favre's more recent stats.. we would have concluded that he probably would have thrown for just as many INTs as TDs.. Possibly even more. He's aging, his arm is a big unknown (with surgery and all), and he's a statue. Oh, and he has shown to make really poor decisions. Every stat we would came up with could have shown us that he's basically done for prior to last season.

And what happened? The unthinkable. He came, he saw, he conquered all. Oh, and he ended up throwing a career low in INTs.. a stat that NO ONE had the cajones to predict.

My point? We are trying to base T-Jack's future by the bits of stats of his past. I know it's the trendy thing to do, and I know and agree that he hasn't shown much. But try to have an open mind if he comes in to play for us. It'll help you deal with the success our favorite NFL team will have despite your personal opinions on how you predicted T-Jack would play.

Me personally? Until he's shown he's absolutely NOT our guy (which will be when he's benched/released/etc.) I'm going to cheer my ass off for him just as hard as I cheer for the Pukers to get smoked week in and week out.

Interesting point Formo.

Then again if you look at expectations for Brett it was dealing with data from him playing on other teams. it was coming to the Vikings and with the talent that surrounded him that he was able to excel. The way I see it, TJ was given that same talent and he floundered in the system outside of a few select games. You can take stats any way you want but just watching the two play in the same offense and seeing how they run it should be enough to give you a good idea of what to expect. There is no light switch that is going to be turned on. You may see a small incremental improvement in one area or another but the body of work in total is going to be similar to what we have seen in the past. A good game here or there mixed in with a bunch of uninspiring moments and a bunch of WTF's.

Caine
05-15-2010, 04:35 PM
Formo wrote:

If we looked at Favre's more recent stats.. we would have concluded that he probably would have thrown for just as many INTs as TDs.. Possibly even more. He's aging, his arm is a big unknown (with surgery and all), and he's a statue. Oh, and he has shown to make really poor decisions. Every stat we would came up with could have shown us that he's basically done for prior to last season.

And what happened? The unthinkable. He came, he saw, he conquered all. Oh, and he ended up throwing a career low in INTs.. a stat that NO ONE had the cajones to predict.

My point? We are trying to base T-Jack's future by the bits of stats of his past. I know it's the trendy thing to do, and I know and agree that he hasn't shown much. But try to have an open mind if he comes in to play for us. It'll help you deal with the success our favorite NFL team will have despite your personal opinions on how you predicted T-Jack would play.

Me personally? Until he's shown he's absolutely NOT our guy (which will be when he's benched/released/etc.) I'm going to cheer my ass off for him just as hard as I cheer for the Pukers to get smoked week in and week out.

One fatal flaw in your logic: Favre has already proven his ability to perform at a high level consistently. Jackson has not.

Further, you're forced to make one of two conclusions based upon the results of last season. Either;

A: The team around Favre made him look much better.

or

B: Favre kicks ass.

If you go with option A, then you're left to explain why Jackson doesn't look anywhere near as good, with almost the same team.

If you go with option B, you simply have to admit that Jackson has sucked wang these past seasons.

Regardless, in every statistical scenario you can dream up to validate Jackson, the end result is that he simply has NOT - to date - shown that he CAN be the starter...which, by extension, means he cannot be. And, unless there is MAJOR improvement in almost all phases of his game, he will continue to NOT be.

The trouble with the Jackson supporters is you're all trying to sell us on the notion that he MIGHT have improved, or he COULD be better...all of which is wishful thinking. Truth is, we ALL hope he's gotten better...much as we hope every player on the roster has improved to a Pro-Bowl level.

But wishing it to be so doesn't make it so. Jackson had 3 years to show he could get the job done - he failed to do so by every imaginable criteria and was REPLACED by a retired Brett Favre. To expect Jackson to suddenly emerge as an elite QB is a pipe dream.

The truth is, all the Jackson fans will likely get their wish. The fact that we have not made a serious move on a legit QB replacement means that either we're going after McNabb next season, or Jackson will be back. And if we get Jackson, we'll all get to see exactly how "improved" he really is....

Caine

ejmat
05-15-2010, 05:00 PM
Caine wrote:

Formo wrote:

If we looked at Favre's more recent stats.. we would have concluded that he probably would have thrown for just as many INTs as TDs.. Possibly even more. He's aging, his arm is a big unknown (with surgery and all), and he's a statue. Oh, and he has shown to make really poor decisions. Every stat we would came up with could have shown us that he's basically done for prior to last season.

And what happened? The unthinkable. He came, he saw, he conquered all. Oh, and he ended up throwing a career low in INTs.. a stat that NO ONE had the cajones to predict.

My point? We are trying to base T-Jack's future by the bits of stats of his past. I know it's the trendy thing to do, and I know and agree that he hasn't shown much. But try to have an open mind if he comes in to play for us. It'll help you deal with the success our favorite NFL team will have despite your personal opinions on how you predicted T-Jack would play.

Me personally? Until he's shown he's absolutely NOT our guy (which will be when he's benched/released/etc.) I'm going to cheer my ass off for him just as hard as I cheer for the Pukers to get smoked week in and week out.

One fatal flaw in your logic: Favre has already proven his ability to perform at a high level consistently. Jackson has not.

Further, you're forced to make one of two conclusions based upon the results of last season. Either;

A: The team around Favre made him look much better.

or

B: Favre kicks ass.

If you go with option A, then you're left to explain why Jackson doesn't look anywhere near as good, with almost the same team.

If you go with option B, you simply have to admit that Jackson has sucked wang these past seasons.

Regardless, in every statistical scenario you can dream up to validate Jackson, the end result is that he simply has NOT - to date - shown that he CAN be the starter...which, by extension, means he cannot be. And, unless there is MAJOR improvement in almost all phases of his game, he will continue to NOT be.

The trouble with the Jackson supporters is you're all trying to sell us on the notion that he MIGHT have improved, or he COULD be better...all of which is wishful thinking. Truth is, we ALL hope he's gotten better...much as we hope every player on the roster has improved to a Pro-Bowl level.

But wishing it to be so doesn't make it so. Jackson had 3 years to show he could get the job done - he failed to do so by every imaginable criteria and was REPLACED by a retired Brett Favre. To expect Jackson to suddenly emerge as an elite QB is a pipe dream.

The truth is, all the Jackson fans will likely get their wish. The fact that we have not made a serious move on a legit QB replacement means that either we're going after McNabb next season, or Jackson will be back. And if we get Jackson, we'll all get to see exactly how "improved" he really is....

Caine

Sarcasm on

But Caine, Jackson has a 113.4 QB rating this past year and a 95.5 in 2008. How can you say these things about Jackson? Where are those linear graphs when you need them? I'll show you!

Sarcasm off

I agree with everything you say here. Although I do think TJ has the potential of being a decent NFL QB, he has not proven it yet as a full time starter. He has not brought the intangables or leadership qualities needed by a starting QB to be successful. I think he has improved in looking to his 2nd option WR but it still remains t be seen if he can go further than that. Plus his accuracy has been inconsistent at best.

Therefore, all I can say at this point he has the potential of becoming better and as of right now all that is wishful thinking as Caine said.

V4L
05-16-2010, 12:26 PM
There's alot of good points in here

I personally like what I saw from Jackson

With a healthy Sid and and Percy coming along.. And new fresh gelling line I think he will be very productive

I hope he plays more consistant

delviking
05-16-2010, 01:55 PM
Caine wrote:

Formo wrote:

If we looked at Favre's more recent stats.. we would have concluded that he probably would have thrown for just as many INTs as TDs.. Possibly even more. He's aging, his arm is a big unknown (with surgery and all), and he's a statue. Oh, and he has shown to make really poor decisions. Every stat we would came up with could have shown us that he's basically done for prior to last season.

And what happened? The unthinkable. He came, he saw, he conquered all. Oh, and he ended up throwing a career low in INTs.. a stat that NO ONE had the cajones to predict.

My point? We are trying to base T-Jack's future by the bits of stats of his past. I know it's the trendy thing to do, and I know and agree that he hasn't shown much. But try to have an open mind if he comes in to play for us. It'll help you deal with the success our favorite NFL team will have despite your personal opinions on how you predicted T-Jack would play.

Me personally? Until he's shown he's absolutely NOT our guy (which will be when he's benched/released/etc.) I'm going to cheer my ass off for him just as hard as I cheer for the Pukers to get smoked week in and week out.

One fatal flaw in your logic: Favre has already proven his ability to perform at a high level consistently. Jackson has not.

Further, you're forced to make one of two conclusions based upon the results of last season. Either;

A: The team around Favre made him look much better.

or

B: Favre kicks ass.

If you go with option A, then you're left to explain why Jackson doesn't look anywhere near as good, with almost the same team.

If you go with option B, you simply have to admit that Jackson has sucked wang these past seasons.

Regardless, in every statistical scenario you can dream up to validate Jackson, the end result is that he simply has NOT - to date - shown that he CAN be the starter...which, by extension, means he cannot be. And, unless there is MAJOR improvement in almost all phases of his game, he will continue to NOT be.

The trouble with the Jackson supporters is you're all trying to sell us on the notion that he MIGHT have improved, or he COULD be better...all of which is wishful thinking. Truth is, we ALL hope he's gotten better...much as we hope every player on the roster has improved to a Pro-Bowl level.

But wishing it to be so doesn't make it so. Jackson had 3 years to show he could get the job done - he failed to do so by every imaginable criteria and was REPLACED by a retired Brett Favre. To expect Jackson to suddenly emerge as an elite QB is a pipe dream.

The truth is, all the Jackson fans will likely get their wish. The fact that we have not made a serious move on a legit QB replacement means that either we're going after McNabb next season, or Jackson will be back. And if we get Jackson, we'll all get to see exactly how "improved" he really is....

Caine



you left out option C.

both are true Farve came in and we finally had a Qb who lasted the entire season, and was practicing with the first team O the entire time instead of split times between jackson and all the other never were and has-beens. Rice was fully healthy and took classes from some of the greatest recievers in the NFL. plus Percy is the type of player you need at slot for the westcoast O we run. Yes the O-line still needs time to Gel and wasnt as effective. also after all with Defenses always targeting peterson instead of Farve he would just change to the pass play and rip it to rice who made some insane graps through out the year, or to harvin who would make three guys miss, or to shank you would just (sarcasm on) club em over the head (sarcasm off).

i_bleed_purple
05-16-2010, 02:11 PM
delviking wrote:

Caine wrote:

Formo wrote:

If we looked at Favre's more recent stats.. we would have concluded that he probably would have thrown for just as many INTs as TDs.. Possibly even more. He's aging, his arm is a big unknown (with surgery and all), and he's a statue. Oh, and he has shown to make really poor decisions. Every stat we would came up with could have shown us that he's basically done for prior to last season.

And what happened? The unthinkable. He came, he saw, he conquered all. Oh, and he ended up throwing a career low in INTs.. a stat that NO ONE had the cajones to predict.

My point? We are trying to base T-Jack's future by the bits of stats of his past. I know it's the trendy thing to do, and I know and agree that he hasn't shown much. But try to have an open mind if he comes in to play for us. It'll help you deal with the success our favorite NFL team will have despite your personal opinions on how you predicted T-Jack would play.

Me personally? Until he's shown he's absolutely NOT our guy (which will be when he's benched/released/etc.) I'm going to cheer my ass off for him just as hard as I cheer for the Pukers to get smoked week in and week out.

One fatal flaw in your logic: Favre has already proven his ability to perform at a high level consistently. Jackson has not.

Further, you're forced to make one of two conclusions based upon the results of last season. Either;

A: The team around Favre made him look much better.

or

B: Favre kicks ass.

If you go with option A, then you're left to explain why Jackson doesn't look anywhere near as good, with almost the same team.

If you go with option B, you simply have to admit that Jackson has sucked wang these past seasons.

Regardless, in every statistical scenario you can dream up to validate Jackson, the end result is that he simply has NOT - to date - shown that he CAN be the starter...which, by extension, means he cannot be. And, unless there is MAJOR improvement in almost all phases of his game, he will continue to NOT be.

The trouble with the Jackson supporters is you're all trying to sell us on the notion that he MIGHT have improved, or he COULD be better...all of which is wishful thinking. Truth is, we ALL hope he's gotten better...much as we hope every player on the roster has improved to a Pro-Bowl level.

But wishing it to be so doesn't make it so. Jackson had 3 years to show he could get the job done - he failed to do so by every imaginable criteria and was REPLACED by a retired Brett Favre. To expect Jackson to suddenly emerge as an elite QB is a pipe dream.

The truth is, all the Jackson fans will likely get their wish. The fact that we have not made a serious move on a legit QB replacement means that either we're going after McNabb next season, or Jackson will be back. And if we get Jackson, we'll all get to see exactly how "improved" he really is....

Caine



you left out option C.

both are true Farve came in and we finally had a Qb who lasted the entire season, and was practicing with the first team O the entire time instead of split times between jackson and all the other never were and has-beens. Rice was fully healthy and took classes from some of the greatest recievers in the NFL. plus Percy is the type of player you need at slot for the westcoast O we run. Yes the O-line still needs time to Gel and wasnt as effective. also after all with Defenses always targeting peterson instead of Farve he would just change to the pass play and rip it to rice who made some insane graps through out the year, or to harvin who would make three guys miss, or to shank you would just (sarcasm on) club em over the head (sarcasm off).

Wait, you mentioned that Favre practiced with the first team all season and thats why he did well right?

Last I checked Favre missed training camp and Jackson was practicing with the first team for a good portion of that time. Yet Favre still somehow managed to come out and play well.

Purple Floyd
05-16-2010, 05:31 PM
i_bleed_purple wrote:

delviking wrote:

Caine wrote:

Formo wrote:

If we looked at Favre's more recent stats.. we would have concluded that he probably would have thrown for just as many INTs as TDs.. Possibly even more. He's aging, his arm is a big unknown (with surgery and all), and he's a statue. Oh, and he has shown to make really poor decisions. Every stat we would came up with could have shown us that he's basically done for prior to last season.

And what happened? The unthinkable. He came, he saw, he conquered all. Oh, and he ended up throwing a career low in INTs.. a stat that NO ONE had the cajones to predict.

My point? We are trying to base T-Jack's future by the bits of stats of his past. I know it's the trendy thing to do, and I know and agree that he hasn't shown much. But try to have an open mind if he comes in to play for us. It'll help you deal with the success our favorite NFL team will have despite your personal opinions on how you predicted T-Jack would play.

Me personally? Until he's shown he's absolutely NOT our guy (which will be when he's benched/released/etc.) I'm going to cheer my ass off for him just as hard as I cheer for the Pukers to get smoked week in and week out.

One fatal flaw in your logic: Favre has already proven his ability to perform at a high level consistently. Jackson has not.

Further, you're forced to make one of two conclusions based upon the results of last season. Either;

A: The team around Favre made him look much better.

or

B: Favre kicks ass.

If you go with option A, then you're left to explain why Jackson doesn't look anywhere near as good, with almost the same team.

If you go with option B, you simply have to admit that Jackson has sucked wang these past seasons.

Regardless, in every statistical scenario you can dream up to validate Jackson, the end result is that he simply has NOT - to date - shown that he CAN be the starter...which, by extension, means he cannot be. And, unless there is MAJOR improvement in almost all phases of his game, he will continue to NOT be.

The trouble with the Jackson supporters is you're all trying to sell us on the notion that he MIGHT have improved, or he COULD be better...all of which is wishful thinking. Truth is, we ALL hope he's gotten better...much as we hope every player on the roster has improved to a Pro-Bowl level.

But wishing it to be so doesn't make it so. Jackson had 3 years to show he could get the job done - he failed to do so by every imaginable criteria and was REPLACED by a retired Brett Favre. To expect Jackson to suddenly emerge as an elite QB is a pipe dream.

The truth is, all the Jackson fans will likely get their wish. The fact that we have not made a serious move on a legit QB replacement means that either we're going after McNabb next season, or Jackson will be back. And if we get Jackson, we'll all get to see exactly how "improved" he really is....

Caine



you left out option C.

both are true Farve came in and we finally had a Qb who lasted the entire season, and was practicing with the first team O the entire time instead of split times between jackson and all the other never were and has-beens. Rice was fully healthy and took classes from some of the greatest recievers in the NFL. plus Percy is the type of player you need at slot for the westcoast O we run. Yes the O-line still needs time to Gel and wasnt as effective. also after all with Defenses always targeting peterson instead of Farve he would just change to the pass play and rip it to rice who made some insane graps through out the year, or to harvin who would make three guys miss, or to shank you would just (sarcasm on) club em over the head (sarcasm off).

Wait, you mentioned that Favre practiced with the first team all season and thats why he did well right?

Last I checked Favre missed training camp and Jackson was practicing with the first team for a good portion of that time. Yet Favre still somehow managed to come out and play well.

Aw crap. Knocked that one right out of the park lol.

expackerfan
05-16-2010, 08:29 PM
Why do I have to reread the same crap 50 times This tresd is 8 pages and you guy keep reposting the same crap. Be happy you have Favre id take him back in Green Bay in a second. And why is he thr noodle?

ejmat
05-16-2010, 09:45 PM
expackerfan wrote:

Why do I have to reread the same crap 50 times This tresd is 8 pages and you guy keep reposting the same crap. Be happy you have Favre id take him back in Green Bay in a second. And why is he thr noodle?

LOL. He is only the noodle to one of our posters. Mr. Marrdro calls him the noodle because he was under the impression he didn't have a good arm anymore based upon his last few games as a Jet.

A lot of us love having Favre but you have to understand for some people it's difficult watching and rooting for a guy that broke our hearts for many years. Sometimes it's hard to forget. I personally always admired Favre even as a Packer for the way he plays the game. I was very happy when the Vikings singed him. But for some, not so much. You can't blame anyone.

By the way, welcome to the site.

soonerbornNbred
05-17-2010, 01:30 AM
Caine wrote:

Formo wrote:

.

One fatal flaw in your logic: Favre has already proven his ability to perform at a high level consistently. Jackson has not.

Further, you're forced to make one of two conclusions based upon the results of last season. Either;

A: The team around Favre made him look much better.

or

B: Favre kicks ass.

If you go with option A, then you're left to explain why Jackson doesn't look anywhere near as good, with almost the same team.

If you go with option B, you simply have to admit that Jackson has sucked wang these past seasons.

Regardless, in every statistical scenario you can dream up to validate Jackson, the end result is that he simply has NOT - to date - shown that he CAN be the starter...which, by extension, means he cannot be. And, unless there is MAJOR improvement in almost all phases of his game, he will continue to NOT be.

The trouble with the Jackson supporters is you're all trying to sell us on the notion that he MIGHT have improved, or he COULD be better...all of which is wishful thinking. Truth is, we ALL hope he's gotten better...much as we hope every player on the roster has improved to a Pro-Bowl level.

But wishing it to be so doesn't make it so. Jackson had 3 years to show he could get the job done - he failed to do so by every imaginable criteria and was REPLACED by a retired Brett Favre. To expect Jackson to suddenly emerge as an elite QB is a pipe dream.

The truth is, all the Jackson fans will likely get their wish. The fact that we have not made a serious move on a legit QB replacement means that either we're going after McNabb next season, or Jackson will be back. And if we get Jackson, we'll all get to see exactly how "improved" he really is....

Caine

A smattering of applause from the bleachers....Caine seems to be in touch with reality as much as a couple of others on here are not :woohoo:

Marrdro
05-17-2010, 09:23 AM
marstc09 wrote:


Interesting. Favre stated all the games. I wonder who said he would not?
That Marrdro guy was pretty vocal about the Noodle. Hell, he is even on that same bandwagon again, even though the Noodle suprised him last year.

Rumor has it, he has his TJ flag ready and waiting to be hoisted the instant the Noodle goes down. ;)

Marrdro
05-17-2010, 09:35 AM
soonerbornNbred wrote:

Caine wrote:

Formo wrote:

.

One fatal flaw in your logic: Favre has already proven his ability to perform at a high level consistently. Jackson has not.

Further, you're forced to make one of two conclusions based upon the results of last season. Either;

A: The team around Favre made him look much better.

or

B: Favre kicks ass.

If you go with option A, then you're left to explain why Jackson doesn't look anywhere near as good, with almost the same team.

If you go with option B, you simply have to admit that Jackson has sucked wang these past seasons.

Regardless, in every statistical scenario you can dream up to validate Jackson, the end result is that he simply has NOT - to date - shown that he CAN be the starter...which, by extension, means he cannot be. And, unless there is MAJOR improvement in almost all phases of his game, he will continue to NOT be.

The trouble with the Jackson supporters is you're all trying to sell us on the notion that he MIGHT have improved, or he COULD be better...all of which is wishful thinking. Truth is, we ALL hope he's gotten better...much as we hope every player on the roster has improved to a Pro-Bowl level.

But wishing it to be so doesn't make it so. Jackson had 3 years to show he could get the job done - he failed to do so by every imaginable criteria and was REPLACED by a retired Brett Favre. To expect Jackson to suddenly emerge as an elite QB is a pipe dream.

The truth is, all the Jackson fans will likely get their wish. The fact that we have not made a serious move on a legit QB replacement means that either we're going after McNabb next season, or Jackson will be back. And if we get Jackson, we'll all get to see exactly how "improved" he really is....

Caine

A smattering of applause from the bleachers....Caine seems to be in touch with reality as much as a couple of others on here are not :woohoo:
There are obvious flaws with Caines post though....



Favre has already proven his ability to perform at a high level consistently. Jackson [u]has not
20 years vs 4 years. I hope to shit the Noodle has proven something after all those years.


If you go with option A, then you're left to explain why Jackson doesn't look anywhere near as good, with almost the same team.
We've had this discussion before and he refuses to acknowledge that this team was better than it ever was last year and will be even better (at least on the offense) than it was last year because of:

a. Injuries vs health. WRs were healthy last year that weren't when TJ was under center.
b. Experience vs inexperience at the WR position. Some yutz says it takes 3 years for a WR to finally get it. Last year was El Syds breakout year, not because of the Noodle alone but talent as well. Some of El Syds catches were just flat out fantastic, especially the ones that weren't catchable. Shanc, even though he looked good with Gus and TJ, he really started to shine last year, making some fantastic catches of balls that were not well thrown.
c. Harvin vs B-wade. PH was a bright light that shined last year as a rook. Can you imagine how much better he will be this year? WOW....
d. Birk vs Sully. We didn't see a turnstyle in there this year at Center with a drastic decrease in sacks coming from delayed blitzes up the middle.
e. PL vs Cook. Is PL a HOF'r yet? No, but he sure did alot better on his first year than any RT on this team for several years. Truth of the matter is, I am almost convinced he will move to LT after this season and we will see a new RT fill that void.

Like it or not, the Noodle had better WR's, a better OL and his experience allowed Bevell to be a bit more creative in play calling.

Again, one would EXPECT that out of a 20 year vet, but only hope that one would see flashes of that out of a 4 year vet.

Really, 2/3 years considering the timeframe that most use to critique young TJ on .....

One thing that my good friend Caine continues to ignore when it comes to the QB carried a team vs a team that can carry a QB discussion......

Why in the hell did the Noodle have his best year ever? Maybe, just maybe this team was a heck of alot better last year and IS capable of carrying a QB, even one that has been in the league for 20 years.......;)

Marrdro
05-17-2010, 09:45 AM
expackerfan wrote:

Why do I have to reread the same crap 50 times This tresd is 8 pages and you guy keep reposting the same crap. Be happy you have Favre id take him back in Green Bay in a second. And why is he thr noodle?
Being the nice guy that I am, I extend a hearty welcome to our little Vikings world.

By the way, EJmat got it almost correct............


Mr. Marrdro calls him the noodle because he was under the impression he didn't have a good arm anymore based upon his last few games as a Jet.

A great analyst "Brian Baldinger" showed a bunch of clips on the Noodles throws starting in 2006 all the way through his little episode with the Jets.

In those clips he showed a change in the Noodles delivery and ball location for long throws.

My opinion last year and this year is centered around those clips, not just the last few games of the Jets fiasco....


A lot of us love having Favre but you have to understand for some people it's difficult watching and rooting for a guy that broke our hearts for many years. Sometimes it's hard to forget. I personally always admired Favre even as a Packer for the way he plays the game. I was very happy when the Vikings singed him. But for some, not so much. You can't blame anyone.


I have also enjoyed (as a fan of the game) watching the Noodle do is thing and chalk him up as one of the greats to ever play that position and am glad I got to watch his career over the years....

Problem is, I'm a Viking fan, and most of those games were against my team. Just to many of them to make me forget that he was (and in my heart he will always be) the enemy.

Again, football fan (Love the cat) - Viking fan (Can't stand the guy, never have, never will).

On a side note, just gotta ask one question......Why did you pick "Expackerfan" as your screen name? Could it be you are really a Lord Noodle Arm Dickhead (LNAD) fan rather than a PUKER (I use that one for Packers by the way) fan?

Marrdro
05-17-2010, 09:50 AM
i_bleed_purple wrote:


Wait, you mentioned that Favre practiced with the first team all season and thats why he did well right?

Last I checked Favre missed training camp and Jackson was practicing with the first team for a good portion of that time. Yet Favre still somehow managed to come out and play well.
As I said earlier,,,,,,,......20 years vs 4 years.

I would hope to shit that a cat that has been in the same offense for 19 of those 20 years could come in and play well.

On a side note, anyone catch that TJ came in with the 3's during the regular season and still moved them down the field and put points on the board against the same defenses the Noodle put points on the board with our 1's with?

Lets see the TJ haters pooooh poooooh that away. :P

ejmat
05-17-2010, 09:56 AM
Marrdro wrote:

expackerfan wrote:

Why do I have to reread the same crap 50 times This tresd is 8 pages and you guy keep reposting the same crap. Be happy you have Favre id take him back in Green Bay in a second. And why is he thr noodle?
Being the nice guy that I am, I extend a hearty welcome to our little Vikings world.

By the way, EJmat got it almost correct............


Mr. Marrdro calls him the noodle because he was under the impression he didn't have a good arm anymore based upon his last few games as a Jet.

A great analyst "Brian Baldinger" showed a bunch of clips on the Noodles throws starting in 2006 all the way through his little episode with the Jets.

In those clips he showed a change in the Noodles delivery and ball location for long throws.

My opinion last year and this year is centered around those clips, not just the last few games of the Jets fiasco....


A lot of us love having Favre but you have to understand for some people it's difficult watching and rooting for a guy that broke our hearts for many years. Sometimes it's hard to forget. I personally always admired Favre even as a Packer for the way he plays the game. I was very happy when the Vikings singed him. But for some, not so much. You can't blame anyone.


I have also enjoyed (as a fan of the game) watching the Noodle do is thing and chalk him up as one of the greats to ever play that position and am glad I got to watch his career over the years....

Problem is, I'm a Viking fan, and most of those games were against my team. Just to many of them to make me forget that he was (and in my heart he will always be) the enemy.

Again, football fan (Love the cat) - Viking fan (Can't stand the guy, never have, never will).

On a side note, just gotta ask one question......Why did you pick "Expackerfan" as your screen name? Could it be you are really a Lord Noodle Arm Dickhead (LNAD) fan rather than a PUKER (I use that one for Packers by the way) fan?

Almost right? I think I hit it pretty head on :P

Regardless of what clips Baldinger showed a lot of us had the question of whether or not his arm was capable of throwing like he did last year. Like I used to tell you that opinion of yours was a valid concern. It worked out very well for the Vikings that the concern was not a problem.

I was wondering the same thing about his name. I think he/she is a Favre fan.

Rockmolder
05-17-2010, 10:03 AM
Marrdro wrote:

soonerbornNbred wrote:

Caine wrote:

Formo wrote:

.

One fatal flaw in your logic: Favre has already proven his ability to perform at a high level consistently. Jackson has not.

Further, you're forced to make one of two conclusions based upon the results of last season. Either;

A: The team around Favre made him look much better.

or

B: Favre kicks ass.

If you go with option A, then you're left to explain why Jackson doesn't look anywhere near as good, with almost the same team.

If you go with option B, you simply have to admit that Jackson has sucked wang these past seasons.

Regardless, in every statistical scenario you can dream up to validate Jackson, the end result is that he simply has NOT - to date - shown that he CAN be the starter...which, by extension, means he cannot be. And, unless there is MAJOR improvement in almost all phases of his game, he will continue to NOT be.

The trouble with the Jackson supporters is you're all trying to sell us on the notion that he MIGHT have improved, or he COULD be better...all of which is wishful thinking. Truth is, we ALL hope he's gotten better...much as we hope every player on the roster has improved to a Pro-Bowl level.

But wishing it to be so doesn't make it so. Jackson had 3 years to show he could get the job done - he failed to do so by every imaginable criteria and was REPLACED by a retired Brett Favre. To expect Jackson to suddenly emerge as an elite QB is a pipe dream.

The truth is, all the Jackson fans will likely get their wish. The fact that we have not made a serious move on a legit QB replacement means that either we're going after McNabb next season, or Jackson will be back. And if we get Jackson, we'll all get to see exactly how "improved" he really is....

Caine

A smattering of applause from the bleachers....Caine seems to be in touch with reality as much as a couple of others on here are not :woohoo:
There are obvious flaws with Caines post though....



Favre has already proven his ability to perform at a high level consistently. Jackson [u]has not
20 years vs 4 years. I hope to shit the Noodle has proven something after all those years.


If you go with option A, then you're left to explain why Jackson doesn't look anywhere near as good, with almost the same team.
We've had this discussion before and he refuses to acknowledge that this team was better than it ever was last year and will be even better (at least on the offense) than it was last year because of:

a. Injuries vs health. WRs were healthy last year that weren't when TJ was under center.
b. Experience vs inexperience at the WR position. Some yutz says it takes 3 years for a WR to finally get it. Last year was El Syds breakout year, not because of the Noodle alone but talent as well. Some of El Syds catches were just flat out fantastic, especially the ones that weren't catchable. Shanc, even though he looked good with Gus and TJ, he really started to shine last year, making some fantastic catches of balls that were not well thrown.
c. Harvin vs B-wade. PH was a bright light that shined last year as a rook. Can you imagine how much better he will be this year? WOW....
d. Birk vs Sully. We didn't see a turnstyle in there this year at Center with a drastic decrease in sacks coming from delayed blitzes up the middle.
e. PL vs Cook. Is PL a HOF'r yet? No, but he sure did alot better on his first year than any RT on this team for several years. Truth of the matter is, I am almost convinced he will move to LT after this season and we will see a new RT fill that void.

Like it or not, the Noodle had better WR's, a better OL and his experience allowed Bevell to be a bit more creative in play calling.

Again, one would EXPECT that out of a 20 year vet, but only hope that one would see flashes of that out of a 4 year vet.

Really, 2/3 years considering the timeframe that most use to critique young TJ on .....

One thing that my good friend Caine continues to ignore when it comes to the QB carried a team vs a team that can carry a QB discussion......

Why in the hell did the Noodle have his best year ever? Maybe, just maybe this team was a heck of alot better last year and IS capable of carrying a QB, even one that has been in the league for 20 years.......;)

I agree with a lot of this. I don't think that TJ will be a great QB, all of a sudden, but I do think that he'll look a lot better than he has in past years. Favre is good QB and makes players around him look better. He brings that veteran leadership, reads defenses very well, sees the blitz coming, but you can't ignore the fact that you improved at nearly every single position on offense.

I think that TJ will benefit so much from having Harvin. Having a versatile weapon like that makes a huge difference.

I don't think that Shiancoe is that good a player. His stats are raised more by him getting the amount of snaps that he does and the QBs he had who relied on the TE a lot, more than him being that good.

Having Harvin as that guy who's open and who you can hit quickly will really help TJ. And if he keeps running those deep routes the way he does, as well, things should be quite good.

Then you get to the improved O-line, Rice, etc. And I think that you can't compare the two situations.

I still don't get the Birk hate. I thought he did great in Baltimore, while Sullivan looked awfully mediocre, but that might just be me.

That said, Jackson won't be Favre. He'll be servicable, but not great, I think. He's someone who can get you there with a good running game, offense and defense, but I don't think that he'll be the driving force behind the team.

Marrdro
05-17-2010, 10:04 AM
ejmat wrote:

Marrdro wrote:

expackerfan wrote:

Why do I have to reread the same crap 50 times This tresd is 8 pages and you guy keep reposting the same crap. Be happy you have Favre id take him back in Green Bay in a second. And why is he thr noodle?
Being the nice guy that I am, I extend a hearty welcome to our little Vikings world.

By the way, EJmat got it almost correct............


Mr. Marrdro calls him the noodle because he was under the impression he didn't have a good arm anymore based upon his last few games as a Jet.

A great analyst "Brian Baldinger" showed a bunch of clips on the Noodles throws starting in 2006 all the way through his little episode with the Jets.

In those clips he showed a change in the Noodles delivery and ball location for long throws.

My opinion last year and this year is centered around those clips, not just the last few games of the Jets fiasco....


A lot of us love having Favre but you have to understand for some people it's difficult watching and rooting for a guy that broke our hearts for many years. Sometimes it's hard to forget. I personally always admired Favre even as a Packer for the way he plays the game. I was very happy when the Vikings singed him. But for some, not so much. You can't blame anyone.


I have also enjoyed (as a fan of the game) watching the Noodle do is thing and chalk him up as one of the greats to ever play that position and am glad I got to watch his career over the years....

Problem is, I'm a Viking fan, and most of those games were against my team. Just to many of them to make me forget that he was (and in my heart he will always be) the enemy.

Again, football fan (Love the cat) - Viking fan (Can't stand the guy, never have, never will).

On a side note, just gotta ask one question......Why did you pick "Expackerfan" as your screen name? Could it be you are really a Lord Noodle Arm Dickhead (LNAD) fan rather than a PUKER (I use that one for Packers by the way) fan?

Almost right? I think I hit it pretty head on :P

Regardless of what clips Baldinger showed a lot of us had the question of whether or not his arm was capable of throwing like he did last year. Like I used to tell you that opinion of yours was a valid concern. It worked out very well for the Vikings that the concern was not a problem.

I was wondering the same thing about his name. I think he/she is a Favre fan.
Uhhhh ohhhhh. I insulted a young lady a few months back by calling her a him.

I hope I didn't do it again. ;)

Marrdro
05-17-2010, 10:10 AM
Rockmolder wrote:

Marrdro wrote:

soonerbornNbred wrote:

Caine wrote:

Formo wrote:

.

One fatal flaw in your logic: Favre has already proven his ability to perform at a high level consistently. Jackson has not.

Further, you're forced to make one of two conclusions based upon the results of last season. Either;

A: The team around Favre made him look much better.

or

B: Favre kicks ass.

If you go with option A, then you're left to explain why Jackson doesn't look anywhere near as good, with almost the same team.

If you go with option B, you simply have to admit that Jackson has sucked wang these past seasons.

Regardless, in every statistical scenario you can dream up to validate Jackson, the end result is that he simply has NOT - to date - shown that he CAN be the starter...which, by extension, means he cannot be. And, unless there is MAJOR improvement in almost all phases of his game, he will continue to NOT be.

The trouble with the Jackson supporters is you're all trying to sell us on the notion that he MIGHT have improved, or he COULD be better...all of which is wishful thinking. Truth is, we ALL hope he's gotten better...much as we hope every player on the roster has improved to a Pro-Bowl level.

But wishing it to be so doesn't make it so. Jackson had 3 years to show he could get the job done - he failed to do so by every imaginable criteria and was REPLACED by a retired Brett Favre. To expect Jackson to suddenly emerge as an elite QB is a pipe dream.

The truth is, all the Jackson fans will likely get their wish. The fact that we have not made a serious move on a legit QB replacement means that either we're going after McNabb next season, or Jackson will be back. And if we get Jackson, we'll all get to see exactly how "improved" he really is....

Caine

A smattering of applause from the bleachers....Caine seems to be in touch with reality as much as a couple of others on here are not :woohoo:
There are obvious flaws with Caines post though....



Favre has already proven his ability to perform at a high level consistently. Jackson [u]has not
20 years vs 4 years. I hope to shit the Noodle has proven something after all those years.


If you go with option A, then you're left to explain why Jackson doesn't look anywhere near as good, with almost the same team.
We've had this discussion before and he refuses to acknowledge that this team was better than it ever was last year and will be even better (at least on the offense) than it was last year because of:

a. Injuries vs health. WRs were healthy last year that weren't when TJ was under center.
b. Experience vs inexperience at the WR position. Some yutz says it takes 3 years for a WR to finally get it. Last year was El Syds breakout year, not because of the Noodle alone but talent as well. Some of El Syds catches were just flat out fantastic, especially the ones that weren't catchable. Shanc, even though he looked good with Gus and TJ, he really started to shine last year, making some fantastic catches of balls that were not well thrown.
c. Harvin vs B-wade. PH was a bright light that shined last year as a rook. Can you imagine how much better he will be this year? WOW....
d. Birk vs Sully. We didn't see a turnstyle in there this year at Center with a drastic decrease in sacks coming from delayed blitzes up the middle.
e. PL vs Cook. Is PL a HOF'r yet? No, but he sure did alot better on his first year than any RT on this team for several years. Truth of the matter is, I am almost convinced he will move to LT after this season and we will see a new RT fill that void.

Like it or not, the Noodle had better WR's, a better OL and his experience allowed Bevell to be a bit more creative in play calling.

Again, one would EXPECT that out of a 20 year vet, but only hope that one would see flashes of that out of a 4 year vet.

Really, 2/3 years considering the timeframe that most use to critique young TJ on .....

One thing that my good friend Caine continues to ignore when it comes to the QB carried a team vs a team that can carry a QB discussion......

Why in the hell did the Noodle have his best year ever? Maybe, just maybe this team was a heck of alot better last year and IS capable of carrying a QB, even one that has been in the league for 20 years.......;)

I agree with a lot of this. I don't think that TJ will be a great QB, all of a sudden, but I do think that he'll look a lot better than he has in past years. Favre is good QB and makes players around him look better. He brings that veteran leadership, reads defenses very well, sees the blitz coming, but you can't ignore the fact that you improved at nearly every single position on offense.

I think that TJ will benefit so much from having Harvin. Having a versatile weapon like that makes a huge difference.

I don't think that Shiancoe is that good a player. His stats are raised more by him getting the amount of snaps that he does and the QBs he had who relied on the TE a lot, more than him being that good.

Having Harvin as that guy who's open and who you can hit quickly will really help TJ. And if he keeps running those deep routes the way he does, as well, things should be quite good.

Then you get to the improved O-line, Rice, etc. And I think that you can't compare the two situations.

I still don't get the Birk hate. I thought he did great in Baltimore, while Sullivan looked awfully mediocre, but that might just be me.

That said, Jackson won't be Favre. He'll be servicable, but not great, I think. He's someone who can get you there with a good running game, offense and defense, but I don't think that he'll be the driving force behind the team.
Couple of comments....

a. Shanc. Shanc actually had a damn fine year with the likes of Gus and TJ throwing to him. It just carried over into the Noodle last year.

We read some quotes from him were he and the staff said it was more along the lines of him getting comfortable his second year (during the Gus/TJ era) and really coming into it in the Noodle era.

b. Birk. No hate from me on Matt. I absolutely hold him as one of the best Vikings to suite it up and strap it on at the Center position.

Problem for me was all the delayed blitzes and inability to pull during the last 2 years he was with the team. If you watched any of the Ravens games you would have seen the same issues.

By the way, statistically Sully graded out just about the same or equal to Matt last year.

Not bad for a cat going into his second year, especially when you look at the defenses he faced (a few that were the same for Matt by the by). ;)

Rockmolder
05-17-2010, 10:24 AM
Marrdro wrote:

Rockmolder wrote:

Marrdro wrote:

soonerbornNbred wrote:

Caine wrote:

Formo wrote:

.

One fatal flaw in your logic: Favre has already proven his ability to perform at a high level consistently. Jackson has not.

Further, you're forced to make one of two conclusions based upon the results of last season. Either;

A: The team around Favre made him look much better.

or

B: Favre kicks ass.

If you go with option A, then you're left to explain why Jackson doesn't look anywhere near as good, with almost the same team.

If you go with option B, you simply have to admit that Jackson has sucked wang these past seasons.

Regardless, in every statistical scenario you can dream up to validate Jackson, the end result is that he simply has NOT - to date - shown that he CAN be the starter...which, by extension, means he cannot be. And, unless there is MAJOR improvement in almost all phases of his game, he will continue to NOT be.

The trouble with the Jackson supporters is you're all trying to sell us on the notion that he MIGHT have improved, or he COULD be better...all of which is wishful thinking. Truth is, we ALL hope he's gotten better...much as we hope every player on the roster has improved to a Pro-Bowl level.

But wishing it to be so doesn't make it so. Jackson had 3 years to show he could get the job done - he failed to do so by every imaginable criteria and was REPLACED by a retired Brett Favre. To expect Jackson to suddenly emerge as an elite QB is a pipe dream.

The truth is, all the Jackson fans will likely get their wish. The fact that we have not made a serious move on a legit QB replacement means that either we're going after McNabb next season, or Jackson will be back. And if we get Jackson, we'll all get to see exactly how "improved" he really is....

Caine

A smattering of applause from the bleachers....Caine seems to be in touch with reality as much as a couple of others on here are not :woohoo:
There are obvious flaws with Caines post though....



Favre has already proven his ability to perform at a high level consistently. Jackson [u]has not
20 years vs 4 years. I hope to shit the Noodle has proven something after all those years.


If you go with option A, then you're left to explain why Jackson doesn't look anywhere near as good, with almost the same team.
We've had this discussion before and he refuses to acknowledge that this team was better than it ever was last year and will be even better (at least on the offense) than it was last year because of:

a. Injuries vs health. WRs were healthy last year that weren't when TJ was under center.
b. Experience vs inexperience at the WR position. Some yutz says it takes 3 years for a WR to finally get it. Last year was El Syds breakout year, not because of the Noodle alone but talent as well. Some of El Syds catches were just flat out fantastic, especially the ones that weren't catchable. Shanc, even though he looked good with Gus and TJ, he really started to shine last year, making some fantastic catches of balls that were not well thrown.
c. Harvin vs B-wade. PH was a bright light that shined last year as a rook. Can you imagine how much better he will be this year? WOW....
d. Birk vs Sully. We didn't see a turnstyle in there this year at Center with a drastic decrease in sacks coming from delayed blitzes up the middle.
e. PL vs Cook. Is PL a HOF'r yet? No, but he sure did alot better on his first year than any RT on this team for several years. Truth of the matter is, I am almost convinced he will move to LT after this season and we will see a new RT fill that void.

Like it or not, the Noodle had better WR's, a better OL and his experience allowed Bevell to be a bit more creative in play calling.

Again, one would EXPECT that out of a 20 year vet, but only hope that one would see flashes of that out of a 4 year vet.

Really, 2/3 years considering the timeframe that most use to critique young TJ on .....

One thing that my good friend Caine continues to ignore when it comes to the QB carried a team vs a team that can carry a QB discussion......

Why in the hell did the Noodle have his best year ever? Maybe, just maybe this team was a heck of alot better last year and IS capable of carrying a QB, even one that has been in the league for 20 years.......;)

I agree with a lot of this. I don't think that TJ will be a great QB, all of a sudden, but I do think that he'll look a lot better than he has in past years. Favre is good QB and makes players around him look better. He brings that veteran leadership, reads defenses very well, sees the blitz coming, but you can't ignore the fact that you improved at nearly every single position on offense.

I think that TJ will benefit so much from having Harvin. Having a versatile weapon like that makes a huge difference.

I don't think that Shiancoe is that good a player. His stats are raised more by him getting the amount of snaps that he does and the QBs he had who relied on the TE a lot, more than him being that good.

Having Harvin as that guy who's open and who you can hit quickly will really help TJ. And if he keeps running those deep routes the way he does, as well, things should be quite good.

Then you get to the improved O-line, Rice, etc. And I think that you can't compare the two situations.

I still don't get the Birk hate. I thought he did great in Baltimore, while Sullivan looked awfully mediocre, but that might just be me.

That said, Jackson won't be Favre. He'll be servicable, but not great, I think. He's someone who can get you there with a good running game, offense and defense, but I don't think that he'll be the driving force behind the team.
Couple of comments....

a. Shanc. Shanc actually had a damn fine year with the likes of Gus and TJ throwing to him. It just carried over into the Noodle last year.

We read some quotes from him were he and the staff said it was more along the lines of him getting comfortable his second year (during the Gus/TJ era) and really coming into it in the Noodle era.

b. Birk. No hate from me on Matt. I absolutely hold him as one of the best Vikings to suite it up and strap it on at the Center position.

Problem for me was all the delayed blitzes and inability to pull during the last 2 years he was with the team. If you watched any of the Ravens games you would have seen the same issues.

By the way, statistically Sully graded out just about the same or equal to Matt last year.

Not bad for a cat going into his second year, especially when you look at the defenses he faced (a few that were the same for Matt by the by). ;)

A. It's just that you have QBs who like to throw to the TE in Frerotte and Favre. No-name Jamie Asher had nearly 500 yards when Frerotte was in Washington. Donald Lee had a career year when he became the starter for our offense when Favre was there.

And Shiancoe reminds me of Lee a lot.

B. I haven't been watching Birk as much as you have and haven't noticed his problems with delayed blitzes, so I'll just take your word for it, but just seeing him and Sullivan play, Birk still looked like the more solid C to me.

And I can't imagine that Sullivan's better at line calls than Birk, but that's more of an experience thing, anyway.

Marrdro
05-17-2010, 10:30 AM
Rockmolder wrote:

Marrdro wrote:

Rockmolder wrote:

Marrdro wrote:

soonerbornNbred wrote:

Caine wrote:

Formo wrote:

.

One fatal flaw in your logic: Favre has already proven his ability to perform at a high level consistently. Jackson has not.

Further, you're forced to make one of two conclusions based upon the results of last season. Either;

A: The team around Favre made him look much better.

or

B: Favre kicks ass.

If you go with option A, then you're left to explain why Jackson doesn't look anywhere near as good, with almost the same team.

If you go with option B, you simply have to admit that Jackson has sucked wang these past seasons.

Regardless, in every statistical scenario you can dream up to validate Jackson, the end result is that he simply has NOT - to date - shown that he CAN be the starter...which, by extension, means he cannot be. And, unless there is MAJOR improvement in almost all phases of his game, he will continue to NOT be.

The trouble with the Jackson supporters is you're all trying to sell us on the notion that he MIGHT have improved, or he COULD be better...all of which is wishful thinking. Truth is, we ALL hope he's gotten better...much as we hope every player on the roster has improved to a Pro-Bowl level.

But wishing it to be so doesn't make it so. Jackson had 3 years to show he could get the job done - he failed to do so by every imaginable criteria and was REPLACED by a retired Brett Favre. To expect Jackson to suddenly emerge as an elite QB is a pipe dream.

The truth is, all the Jackson fans will likely get their wish. The fact that we have not made a serious move on a legit QB replacement means that either we're going after McNabb next season, or Jackson will be back. And if we get Jackson, we'll all get to see exactly how "improved" he really is....

Caine

A smattering of applause from the bleachers....Caine seems to be in touch with reality as much as a couple of others on here are not :woohoo:
There are obvious flaws with Caines post though....



Favre has already proven his ability to perform at a high level consistently. Jackson [u]has not
20 years vs 4 years. I hope to shit the Noodle has proven something after all those years.


If you go with option A, then you're left to explain why Jackson doesn't look anywhere near as good, with almost the same team.
We've had this discussion before and he refuses to acknowledge that this team was better than it ever was last year and will be even better (at least on the offense) than it was last year because of:

a. Injuries vs health. WRs were healthy last year that weren't when TJ was under center.
b. Experience vs inexperience at the WR position. Some yutz says it takes 3 years for a WR to finally get it. Last year was El Syds breakout year, not because of the Noodle alone but talent as well. Some of El Syds catches were just flat out fantastic, especially the ones that weren't catchable. Shanc, even though he looked good with Gus and TJ, he really started to shine last year, making some fantastic catches of balls that were not well thrown.
c. Harvin vs B-wade. PH was a bright light that shined last year as a rook. Can you imagine how much better he will be this year? WOW....
d. Birk vs Sully. We didn't see a turnstyle in there this year at Center with a drastic decrease in sacks coming from delayed blitzes up the middle.
e. PL vs Cook. Is PL a HOF'r yet? No, but he sure did alot better on his first year than any RT on this team for several years. Truth of the matter is, I am almost convinced he will move to LT after this season and we will see a new RT fill that void.

Like it or not, the Noodle had better WR's, a better OL and his experience allowed Bevell to be a bit more creative in play calling.

Again, one would EXPECT that out of a 20 year vet, but only hope that one would see flashes of that out of a 4 year vet.

Really, 2/3 years considering the timeframe that most use to critique young TJ on .....

One thing that my good friend Caine continues to ignore when it comes to the QB carried a team vs a team that can carry a QB discussion......

Why in the hell did the Noodle have his best year ever? Maybe, just maybe this team was a heck of alot better last year and IS capable of carrying a QB, even one that has been in the league for 20 years.......;)

I agree with a lot of this. I don't think that TJ will be a great QB, all of a sudden, but I do think that he'll look a lot better than he has in past years. Favre is good QB and makes players around him look better. He brings that veteran leadership, reads defenses very well, sees the blitz coming, but you can't ignore the fact that you improved at nearly every single position on offense.

I think that TJ will benefit so much from having Harvin. Having a versatile weapon like that makes a huge difference.

I don't think that Shiancoe is that good a player. His stats are raised more by him getting the amount of snaps that he does and the QBs he had who relied on the TE a lot, more than him being that good.

Having Harvin as that guy who's open and who you can hit quickly will really help TJ. And if he keeps running those deep routes the way he does, as well, things should be quite good.

Then you get to the improved O-line, Rice, etc. And I think that you can't compare the two situations.

I still don't get the Birk hate. I thought he did great in Baltimore, while Sullivan looked awfully mediocre, but that might just be me.

That said, Jackson won't be Favre. He'll be servicable, but not great, I think. He's someone who can get you there with a good running game, offense and defense, but I don't think that he'll be the driving force behind the team.
Couple of comments....

a. Shanc. Shanc actually had a damn fine year with the likes of Gus and TJ throwing to him. It just carried over into the Noodle last year.

We read some quotes from him were he and the staff said it was more along the lines of him getting comfortable his second year (during the Gus/TJ era) and really coming into it in the Noodle era.

b. Birk. No hate from me on Matt. I absolutely hold him as one of the best Vikings to suite it up and strap it on at the Center position.

Problem for me was all the delayed blitzes and inability to pull during the last 2 years he was with the team. If you watched any of the Ravens games you would have seen the same issues.

By the way, statistically Sully graded out just about the same or equal to Matt last year.

Not bad for a cat going into his second year, especially when you look at the defenses he faced (a few that were the same for Matt by the by). ;)

A. It's just that you have QBs who like to throw to the TE in Frerotte and Favre. No-name Jamie Asher had nearly 500 yards when Frerotte was in Washington. Donald Lee had a career year when he became the starter for our offense when Favre was there.

And Shiancoe reminds me of Lee a lot.

B. I haven't been watching Birk as much as you have and haven't noticed his problems with delayed blitzes, so I'll just take your word for it, but just seeing him and Sullivan play, Birk still looked like the more solid C to me.

And I can't imagine that Sullivan's better at line calls than Birk, but that's more of an experience thing, anyway.
Actually saw several quotes from the Noodle himself saying that Sully didn't need much help from him this year, but I kindof think that was the Noodle kindof absorbing a bit from the "Minnesota Nice" crowd and not really taking the credit for his role in helping in that area.

On a side note, that is one of the things I give the Noodle credit for that most Noodle CSA'rs forget about when I hack on his short comings. :huh:

tarkenton10
05-17-2010, 10:32 AM
Marrdro wrote:

Rockmolder wrote:

Marrdro wrote:

soonerbornNbred wrote:

Caine wrote:

Formo wrote:

.

One fatal flaw in your logic: Favre has already proven his ability to perform at a high level consistently. Jackson has not.

Further, you're forced to make one of two conclusions based upon the results of last season. Either;

A: The team around Favre made him look much better.

or

B: Favre kicks ass.

If you go with option A, then you're left to explain why Jackson doesn't look anywhere near as good, with almost the same team.

If you go with option B, you simply have to admit that Jackson has sucked wang these past seasons.

Regardless, in every statistical scenario you can dream up to validate Jackson, the end result is that he simply has NOT - to date - shown that he CAN be the starter...which, by extension, means he cannot be. And, unless there is MAJOR improvement in almost all phases of his game, he will continue to NOT be.

The trouble with the Jackson supporters is you're all trying to sell us on the notion that he MIGHT have improved, or he COULD be better...all of which is wishful thinking. Truth is, we ALL hope he's gotten better...much as we hope every player on the roster has improved to a Pro-Bowl level.

But wishing it to be so doesn't make it so. Jackson had 3 years to show he could get the job done - he failed to do so by every imaginable criteria and was REPLACED by a retired Brett Favre. To expect Jackson to suddenly emerge as an elite QB is a pipe dream.

The truth is, all the Jackson fans will likely get their wish. The fact that we have not made a serious move on a legit QB replacement means that either we're going after McNabb next season, or Jackson will be back. And if we get Jackson, we'll all get to see exactly how "improved" he really is....

Caine

A smattering of applause from the bleachers....Caine seems to be in touch with reality as much as a couple of others on here are not :woohoo:
There are obvious flaws with Caines post though....



Favre has already proven his ability to perform at a high level consistently. Jackson [u]has not
20 years vs 4 years. I hope to shit the Noodle has proven something after all those years.


If you go with option A, then you're left to explain why Jackson doesn't look anywhere near as good, with almost the same team.
We've had this discussion before and he refuses to acknowledge that this team was better than it ever was last year and will be even better (at least on the offense) than it was last year because of:

a. Injuries vs health. WRs were healthy last year that weren't when TJ was under center.
b. Experience vs inexperience at the WR position. Some yutz says it takes 3 years for a WR to finally get it. Last year was El Syds breakout year, not because of the Noodle alone but talent as well. Some of El Syds catches were just flat out fantastic, especially the ones that weren't catchable. Shanc, even though he looked good with Gus and TJ, he really started to shine last year, making some fantastic catches of balls that were not well thrown.
c. Harvin vs B-wade. PH was a bright light that shined last year as a rook. Can you imagine how much better he will be this year? WOW....
d. Birk vs Sully. We didn't see a turnstyle in there this year at Center with a drastic decrease in sacks coming from delayed blitzes up the middle.
e. PL vs Cook. Is PL a HOF'r yet? No, but he sure did alot better on his first year than any RT on this team for several years. Truth of the matter is, I am almost convinced he will move to LT after this season and we will see a new RT fill that void.

Like it or not, the Noodle had better WR's, a better OL and his experience allowed Bevell to be a bit more creative in play calling.

Again, one would EXPECT that out of a 20 year vet, but only hope that one would see flashes of that out of a 4 year vet.

Really, 2/3 years considering the timeframe that most use to critique young TJ on .....

One thing that my good friend Caine continues to ignore when it comes to the QB carried a team vs a team that can carry a QB discussion......

Why in the hell did the Noodle have his best year ever? Maybe, just maybe this team was a heck of alot better last year and IS capable of carrying a QB, even one that has been in the league for 20 years.......;)

I agree with a lot of this. I don't think that TJ will be a great QB, all of a sudden, but I do think that he'll look a lot better than he has in past years. Favre is good QB and makes players around him look better. He brings that veteran leadership, reads defenses very well, sees the blitz coming, but you can't ignore the fact that you improved at nearly every single position on offense.

I think that TJ will benefit so much from having Harvin. Having a versatile weapon like that makes a huge difference.

I don't think that Shiancoe is that good a player. His stats are raised more by him getting the amount of snaps that he does and the QBs he had who relied on the TE a lot, more than him being that good.

Having Harvin as that guy who's open and who you can hit quickly will really help TJ. And if he keeps running those deep routes the way he does, as well, things should be quite good.

Then you get to the improved O-line, Rice, etc. And I think that you can't compare the two situations.

I still don't get the Birk hate. I thought he did great in Baltimore, while Sullivan looked awfully mediocre, but that might just be me.

That said, Jackson won't be Favre. He'll be servicable, but not great, I think. He's someone who can get you there with a good running game, offense and defense, but I don't think that he'll be the driving force behind the team.
Couple of comments....

a. Shanc. Shanc actually had a damn fine year with the likes of Gus and TJ throwing to him. It just carried over into the Noodle last year.

We read some quotes from him were he and the staff said it was more along the lines of him getting comfortable his second year (during the Gus/TJ era) and really coming into it in the Noodle era.

b. Birk. No hate from me on Matt. I absolutely hold him as one of the best Vikings to suite it up and strap it on at the Center position.

Problem for me was all the delayed blitzes and inability to pull during the last 2 years he was with the team. If you watched any of the Ravens games you would have seen the same issues.

By the way, statistically Sully graded out just about the same or equal to Matt last year.

Not bad for a cat going into his second year, especially when you look at the defenses he faced (a few that were the same for Matt by the by). ;)

TJ is a question mark no matter how you slice it. There are just more questions than answers.

Sully is a move you had to make, while I think he may not have been as good as Birk last year he was close enough that you could let Birk go. You ahve two very different players. One is on his way down andhis play willonly get worse and you have a young player who will only get better. I think this year Sully will grade out as good or BETTER than Birk. That means it was a good move, even if he is only as good as Birk we will still have that quality play for another ten years. Birk is just about done!

Shank is a good TE but we could upgrade if the right player came along. Unfortunately we have more pressing needs and Shank is good enough not to worry aobut that position.

Marrdro
05-17-2010, 11:12 AM
tarkenton10 wrote:

Marrdro wrote:

Rockmolder wrote:

Marrdro wrote:

soonerbornNbred wrote:

Caine wrote:

Formo wrote:

.

One fatal flaw in your logic: Favre has already proven his ability to perform at a high level consistently. Jackson has not.

Further, you're forced to make one of two conclusions based upon the results of last season. Either;

A: The team around Favre made him look much better.

or

B: Favre kicks ass.

If you go with option A, then you're left to explain why Jackson doesn't look anywhere near as good, with almost the same team.

If you go with option B, you simply have to admit that Jackson has sucked wang these past seasons.

Regardless, in every statistical scenario you can dream up to validate Jackson, the end result is that he simply has NOT - to date - shown that he CAN be the starter...which, by extension, means he cannot be. And, unless there is MAJOR improvement in almost all phases of his game, he will continue to NOT be.

The trouble with the Jackson supporters is you're all trying to sell us on the notion that he MIGHT have improved, or he COULD be better...all of which is wishful thinking. Truth is, we ALL hope he's gotten better...much as we hope every player on the roster has improved to a Pro-Bowl level.

But wishing it to be so doesn't make it so. Jackson had 3 years to show he could get the job done - he failed to do so by every imaginable criteria and was REPLACED by a retired Brett Favre. To expect Jackson to suddenly emerge as an elite QB is a pipe dream.

The truth is, all the Jackson fans will likely get their wish. The fact that we have not made a serious move on a legit QB replacement means that either we're going after McNabb next season, or Jackson will be back. And if we get Jackson, we'll all get to see exactly how "improved" he really is....

Caine

A smattering of applause from the bleachers....Caine seems to be in touch with reality as much as a couple of others on here are not :woohoo:
There are obvious flaws with Caines post though....



Favre has already proven his ability to perform at a high level consistently. Jackson [u]has not
20 years vs 4 years. I hope to shit the Noodle has proven something after all those years.


If you go with option A, then you're left to explain why Jackson doesn't look anywhere near as good, with almost the same team.
We've had this discussion before and he refuses to acknowledge that this team was better than it ever was last year and will be even better (at least on the offense) than it was last year because of:

a. Injuries vs health. WRs were healthy last year that weren't when TJ was under center.
b. Experience vs inexperience at the WR position. Some yutz says it takes 3 years for a WR to finally get it. Last year was El Syds breakout year, not because of the Noodle alone but talent as well. Some of El Syds catches were just flat out fantastic, especially the ones that weren't catchable. Shanc, even though he looked good with Gus and TJ, he really started to shine last year, making some fantastic catches of balls that were not well thrown.
c. Harvin vs B-wade. PH was a bright light that shined last year as a rook. Can you imagine how much better he will be this year? WOW....
d. Birk vs Sully. We didn't see a turnstyle in there this year at Center with a drastic decrease in sacks coming from delayed blitzes up the middle.
e. PL vs Cook. Is PL a HOF'r yet? No, but he sure did alot better on his first year than any RT on this team for several years. Truth of the matter is, I am almost convinced he will move to LT after this season and we will see a new RT fill that void.

Like it or not, the Noodle had better WR's, a better OL and his experience allowed Bevell to be a bit more creative in play calling.

Again, one would EXPECT that out of a 20 year vet, but only hope that one would see flashes of that out of a 4 year vet.

Really, 2/3 years considering the timeframe that most use to critique young TJ on .....

One thing that my good friend Caine continues to ignore when it comes to the QB carried a team vs a team that can carry a QB discussion......

Why in the hell did the Noodle have his best year ever? Maybe, just maybe this team was a heck of alot better last year and IS capable of carrying a QB, even one that has been in the league for 20 years.......;)

I agree with a lot of this. I don't think that TJ will be a great QB, all of a sudden, but I do think that he'll look a lot better than he has in past years. Favre is good QB and makes players around him look better. He brings that veteran leadership, reads defenses very well, sees the blitz coming, but you can't ignore the fact that you improved at nearly every single position on offense.

I think that TJ will benefit so much from having Harvin. Having a versatile weapon like that makes a huge difference.

I don't think that Shiancoe is that good a player. His stats are raised more by him getting the amount of snaps that he does and the QBs he had who relied on the TE a lot, more than him being that good.

Having Harvin as that guy who's open and who you can hit quickly will really help TJ. And if he keeps running those deep routes the way he does, as well, things should be quite good.

Then you get to the improved O-line, Rice, etc. And I think that you can't compare the two situations.

I still don't get the Birk hate. I thought he did great in Baltimore, while Sullivan looked awfully mediocre, but that might just be me.

That said, Jackson won't be Favre. He'll be servicable, but not great, I think. He's someone who can get you there with a good running game, offense and defense, but I don't think that he'll be the driving force behind the team.
Couple of comments....

a. Shanc. Shanc actually had a damn fine year with the likes of Gus and TJ throwing to him. It just carried over into the Noodle last year.

We read some quotes from him were he and the staff said it was more along the lines of him getting comfortable his second year (during the Gus/TJ era) and really coming into it in the Noodle era.

b. Birk. No hate from me on Matt. I absolutely hold him as one of the best Vikings to suite it up and strap it on at the Center position.

Problem for me was all the delayed blitzes and inability to pull during the last 2 years he was with the team. If you watched any of the Ravens games you would have seen the same issues.

By the way, statistically Sully graded out just about the same or equal to Matt last year.

Not bad for a cat going into his second year, especially when you look at the defenses he faced (a few that were the same for Matt by the by). ;)

TJ is a question mark no matter how you slice it. There are just more questions than answers.

Sully is a move you had to make, while I think he may not have been as good as Birk last year he was close enough that you could let Birk go. You ahve two very different players. One is on his way down andhis play willonly get worse and you have a young player who will only get better. I think this year Sully will grade out as good or BETTER than Birk. That means it was a good move, even if he is only as good as Birk we will still have that quality play for another ten years. Birk is just about done!

Shank is a good TE but we could upgrade if the right player came along. Unfortunately we have more pressing needs and Shank is good enough not to worry aobut that position.
Quality post my friend.

On a side note, you see were Shanc is gonna add the weight back on he shed last year?


A few days after the NFC championship game defeat, Shiancoe began preparing for 2010, mostly with intense stretching exercises designed to keep his muscles toned. The 6-foot-4 Shiancoe, whose playing weight ranged from 235 to 242 pounds in í09, plans to beef up to 245 this season, yet he claims heíll be quicker and more explosive.

Shiancoe seeking unlimited exposure (http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news?slug=ms-thegameface051410)

Could it be we are seeing the makings of a "Run first" team again this year.

Rationale, Shanc getting big again equals more blocking, Toby = a big bruising back equates to more physical running, new TE's equate to more two TE sets which equate to more running.

I can't wait to see what this offense looks like this year.

Caine
05-17-2010, 11:29 AM
Marrdro wrote:

soonerbornNbred wrote:

Caine wrote:

Formo wrote:

.

One fatal flaw in your logic: Favre has already proven his ability to perform at a high level consistently. Jackson has not.

Further, you're forced to make one of two conclusions based upon the results of last season. Either;

A: The team around Favre made him look much better.

or

B: Favre kicks ass.

If you go with option A, then you're left to explain why Jackson doesn't look anywhere near as good, with almost the same team.

If you go with option B, you simply have to admit that Jackson has sucked wang these past seasons.

Regardless, in every statistical scenario you can dream up to validate Jackson, the end result is that he simply has NOT - to date - shown that he CAN be the starter...which, by extension, means he cannot be. And, unless there is MAJOR improvement in almost all phases of his game, he will continue to NOT be.

The trouble with the Jackson supporters is you're all trying to sell us on the notion that he MIGHT have improved, or he COULD be better...all of which is wishful thinking. Truth is, we ALL hope he's gotten better...much as we hope every player on the roster has improved to a Pro-Bowl level.

But wishing it to be so doesn't make it so. Jackson had 3 years to show he could get the job done - he failed to do so by every imaginable criteria and was REPLACED by a retired Brett Favre. To expect Jackson to suddenly emerge as an elite QB is a pipe dream.

The truth is, all the Jackson fans will likely get their wish. The fact that we have not made a serious move on a legit QB replacement means that either we're going after McNabb next season, or Jackson will be back. And if we get Jackson, we'll all get to see exactly how "improved" he really is....

Caine

A smattering of applause from the bleachers....Caine seems to be in touch with reality as much as a couple of others on here are not :woohoo:
There are obvious flaws with Caines post though....



Favre has already proven his ability to perform at a high level consistently. Jackson [u]has not
20 years vs 4 years. I hope to shit the Noodle has proven something after all those years.


If you go with option A, then you're left to explain why Jackson doesn't look anywhere near as good, with almost the same team.
We've had this discussion before and he refuses to acknowledge that this team was better than it ever was last year and will be even better (at least on the offense) than it was last year because of:

a. Injuries vs health. WRs were healthy last year that weren't when TJ was under center.
b. Experience vs inexperience at the WR position. Some yutz says it takes 3 years for a WR to finally get it. Last year was El Syds breakout year, not because of the Noodle alone but talent as well. Some of El Syds catches were just flat out fantastic, especially the ones that weren't catchable. Shanc, even though he looked good with Gus and TJ, he really started to shine last year, making some fantastic catches of balls that were not well thrown.
c. Harvin vs B-wade. PH was a bright light that shined last year as a rook. Can you imagine how much better he will be this year? WOW....
d. Birk vs Sully. We didn't see a turnstyle in there this year at Center with a drastic decrease in sacks coming from delayed blitzes up the middle.
e. PL vs Cook. Is PL a HOF'r yet? No, but he sure did alot better on his first year than any RT on this team for several years. Truth of the matter is, I am almost convinced he will move to LT after this season and we will see a new RT fill that void.

Like it or not, the Noodle had better WR's, a better OL and his experience allowed Bevell to be a bit more creative in play calling.

Again, one would EXPECT that out of a 20 year vet, but only hope that one would see flashes of that out of a 4 year vet.

Really, 2/3 years considering the timeframe that most use to critique young TJ on .....

One thing that my good friend Caine continues to ignore when it comes to the QB carried a team vs a team that can carry a QB discussion......

Why in the hell did the Noodle have his best year ever? Maybe, just maybe this team was a heck of alot better last year and IS capable of carrying a QB, even one that has been in the league for 20 years.......;)

Marrdro, why punish yourself like this?

1: I don't ignore your illusory "points" - I have refuted them on numerous occassions. Why you keep attempting to foist them off as valid is beyond comprehension. We have shown REPEATEDLY that the differences between the 08 and 09 rosters weren't that significant.

A: The only injury that affected Jackson was Rice. Favre was affected by an unhealthy Berrian. That's a wash.

B: You talk about Rice's development - do you honestly believe that Rice has that good of a year with Jackson under center? Do you think his produictivity is even CLOSE to what is was with Favre? I don't. Favre has made a career of making good receivers look great, and average receivers look good. He did it time and time again in Green Bay. Why is it so hard to believe that MAYBE he did it again here? MAYBE, Favre drew it out of Rice? Of course, were youto admit that, you'd have to choke on the heaping piles of caacaa you've been spewing about Favre, so I can see why you'd prefer to stay in denial...

Refuted.


C: Harvin was a rookie - Wade a proven possession guy. Do you - again - bnelieve taht Harvin would have been OROY had Jackson been throwing to him? Do you think Jackson could bring Harvin's talents screaming to the forefront? Because I know Jackson really brought out the talents of .....well ......ummmm ......Gus Frerotte!!!

Again...refuted.

D: You still trying to sell the idea that Sully was head and shoulders better than Birk? My eye!! Sully was good...MAYBE close to as good as Birk the season before...but Sully has a bit of improving to do before he's considered the next Matt Birk. And, FYI, the turnstile was still there...Favre just got rid of the ball quicker.

REFUTED!!!

E: And again you're trying to say that Loadholt was a dominant force? Not really. An upgrade over Cook? Yes...but not a HUGE upgrade...YET. Again, you're overstating the impact that Loadholt had on the line, much as you do with Sullivan. Our line wasn't really that much better in 09 than in 08, but it finally has the POTENTIAL to be. The real difference was having a QB who can snap through teh reads adn get rid of the ball versus a QB who has trademarked the "Deer in headlights" look...

REFUTED.

F: Finally, you blathered on in the end about why Favre had his best year ever....again, it was partly the team. But I ask you themn why Jackson hasn't been a statistical force to be reckoned with with VIRTUALLY the same team (Only YOU seem to beleive that we suddenly exploded with talent in 09).

The TRUTH is, Favre is a better QB than Jackson. Given virtually the same tools, Favre produced something close to a statistical miracle in 09. Something that Jackson would likely sell his soul to do in ANY year. And, in order to validate your position, answer only this question, "If Jackson were to suddenly become the starter right now, would be put up the same numbers or numbers close to what Favre did last season?"

If you can't deliver a convincing "Yes he would" - and we all know you can't - then your entire arguenment is shiite, mostly because you seek to discount Favre entirely as a factor. Especially in the production of Rice and Harvin.

The TRUTH is that were Jackson to start right now, we'd see production similar to 08's numbers. Maybe a touch better from time to time, but mostly about the same.

Again, I don't "Ignore" your points Marr... in this particular instance, I flat out disagree with them.

Caine

Marrdro
05-17-2010, 11:51 AM
Caine wrote:


Marrdro, why punish yourself like this?

1: I don't ignore your illusory "points" - I have refuted them on numerous occassions. Why you keep attempting to foist them off as valid is beyond comprehension. We have shown REPEATEDLY that the differences between the 08 and 09 rosters weren't that significant.

A: The only injury that affected Jackson was Rice. Favre was affected by an unhealthy Berrian. That's a wash.


LOL refuted.....Love it.

Both Rice and BB were injured the whole season. Last year Rice was healthy the whole season and BB was only digned early on.

Truth of the matter is, BB was used alot in the short stuff were he didn't really fit and still did a good job.



B: You talk about Rice's development - do you honestly believe that Rice has that good of a year with Jackson under center? Do you think his produictivity is even CLOSE to what is was with Favre? I don't. Favre has made a career of making good receivers look great, and average receivers look good. He did it time and time again in Green Bay. Why is it so hard to believe that MAYBE he did it again here? MAYBE, Favre drew it out of Rice? Of course, were youto admit that, you'd have to choke on the heaping piles of caacaa you've been spewing about Favre, so I can see why you'd prefer to stay in denial...Refuted.
Again you fail to mention that El Syd was hindered for the whole season which severly degraded his ability to be 100% effective that season.

Did the Noodle help in his development? Yes, I readily admit that, but I have listed reception after reception were Rice also made the Noodle look pretty damn good.




C: Harvin was a rookie - Wade a proven possession guy. Do you - again - bnelieve taht Harvin would have been OROY had Jackson been throwing to him? Do you think Jackson could bring Harvin's talents screaming to the forefront? Because I know Jackson really brought out the talents of .....well ......ummmm ......Gus Frerotte!!!

Again...refuted.
First, you know my stance on individual awards. They are all garbage.

In the end, would he have had as good of a year? I agree, probably not, but he sure didn't hold the Noodle back. Seems to me the young lad was a prime target if El Syd wasn't covered.

My guess, he had the skills to get open regardless of who was under Center and would have seen his share of throws.


D: You still trying to sell the idea that Sully was head and shoulders better than Birk? My eye!! Sully was good...MAYBE close to as good as Birk the season before...but Sully has a bit of improving to do before he's considered the next Matt Birk. And, FYI, the turnstile was still there...Favre just got rid of the ball quicker.

REFUTED!!!
Nope, you said "Head and Shoulders", I said graded out statistically the same or just slightly below Matt.

Even you would have to admit that the Noodle got alot less pressure up the middle from LB'rs this year.


E: And again you're trying to say that Loadholt was a dominant force? Not really. An upgrade over Cook? Yes...but not a HUGE upgrade...YET. Again, you're overstating the impact that Loadholt had on the line, much as you do with Sullivan. Our line wasn't really that much better in 09 than in 08, but it finally has the POTENTIAL to be. The real difference was having a QB who can snap through teh reads adn get rid of the ball versus a QB who has trademarked the "Deer in headlights" look...

REFUTED.
Show me were I have ever said "Dominant" together with any rook, especially an OLmen.

I think I quantified his play as better than any RT we've had for several years. Show me a RT from the last 10 years that you would rather have than Load right now.


F: Finally, you blathered on in the end about why Favre had his best year ever....again, it was partly the team. But I ask you themn why Jackson hasn't been a statistical force to be reckoned with with VIRTUALLY the same team (Only YOU seem to beleive that we suddenly exploded with talent in 09).
I like how you dodge the question. Are you sure you aren't a lawyer or a politician?


The TRUTH is, Favre is a better QB than Jackson.
Again, 20 years vs 4 years. I hope to all that is holy in this world that he is a better QB.

Anyone who wouldn't agree with that is just silly.

However, coma, you didn't explain why the Noodle, who didn't take the "I'm gonna be better than I have ever been in my 20 years" pill, actually put up his best year ever and even went so far as to say several times how this was the best team he had ever been on.

Pretty lofty comments from the Noodle. Heck, he should know, he's been on alot of teams.


Given virtually the same tools, Favre produced something close to a statistical miracle in 09.
Now we are in the "Virtual World".

LOL, comeon my friend, you know that isn't gonna slide.


Something that Jackson would likely sell his soul to do in ANY year.
Of course he would, just like Sage would, Rodgers would, etc etc etc.


And, in order to validate your position, answer only this question, "If Jackson were to suddenly become the starter right now, would be put up the same numbers or numbers close to what Favre did last season?"
I wouldn't expect him to put up the Noodles numbers. Hell, I don't believe the Noodle will be able to do that agian this year, even with this team.

But I do believe he wouldn't have to be carried by this team this year. I think he has matured enough to actually run the offense, just like he did with the 3's against the other teams 1's last year.



If you can't deliver a convincing "Yes he would" - and we all know you can't - then your entire arguenment is shiite, mostly because you seek to discount Favre entirely as a factor. Especially in the production of Rice and Harvin.
Nope, my entire discussion is that I expect he will play like a 4 year vet, just like I expect the Noodle will play like a 20 year vet.

Is that shiite or reality or just my refusal to live in the "Virtual World" of Caine? :P


The TRUTH is that were Jackson to start right now, we'd see production similar to 08's numbers. Maybe a touch better from time to time, but mostly about the same.
I agree, but I believe they would be just a bit better than you do.


Again, I don't "Ignore" your points Marr... in this particular instance, I flat out disagree with them.

Caine :P
I know, but now I know why......One of us is an optimist, the other well, ......is kindof in the virtual world....
Given virtually . :P

12purplepride28
05-17-2010, 12:24 PM
I would quote the specific part but I think it would turn into a mess of a post, but @Marrdro, I don't think Rodgers would sell his soul to have that kind of a year. He had 3 less TDs and 300 more yards, and I'm sure he will only improve.

I would love to jump in on this arguement (debate?) but I have class. Ahh, maybe later.

Marrdro
05-17-2010, 12:28 PM
12purplepride28 wrote:

I would quote the specific part but I think it would turn into a mess of a post, but @Marrdro, I don't think Rodgers would sell his soul to have that kind of a year. He had 3 less TDs and 300 more yards, and I'm sure he will only improve.

I would love to jump in on this arguement (debate?) but I have class. Ahh, maybe later.
Excellent point my friend. I kindof lumped the INT's (Rodgers vs the Noodle) into that context.

In short, he had a amazing year and justified TT for making the shift, I just think he would love to have a few of those throws back.

Rockmolder
05-17-2010, 12:29 PM
12purplepride28 wrote:

I would quote the specific part but I think it would turn into a mess of a post, but @Marrdro, I don't think Rodgers would sell his soul to have that kind of a year. He had 3 less TDs and 300 more yards, and I'm sure he will only improve.

I would love to jump in on this arguement (debate?) but I have class. Ahh, maybe later.

I like you.

Caine
05-17-2010, 12:32 PM
Marrdro wrote:

Caine wrote:


Marrdro, why punish yourself like this?

1: I don't ignore your illusory "points" - I have refuted them on numerous occassions. Why you keep attempting to foist them off as valid is beyond comprehension. We have shown REPEATEDLY that the differences between the 08 and 09 rosters weren't that significant.

A: The only injury that affected Jackson was Rice. Favre was affected by an unhealthy Berrian. That's a wash.


LOL refuted.....Love it.

Both Rice and BB were injured the whole season. Last year Rice was healthy the whole season and BB was only digned early on.

Truth of the matter is, BB was used alot in the short stuff were he didn't really fit and still did a good job.



B: You talk about Rice's development - do you honestly believe that Rice has that good of a year with Jackson under center? Do you think his produictivity is even CLOSE to what is was with Favre? I don't. Favre has made a career of making good receivers look great, and average receivers look good. He did it time and time again in Green Bay. Why is it so hard to believe that MAYBE he did it again here? MAYBE, Favre drew it out of Rice? Of course, were youto admit that, you'd have to choke on the heaping piles of caacaa you've been spewing about Favre, so I can see why you'd prefer to stay in denial...Refuted.
Again you fail to mention that El Syd was hindered for the whole season which severly degraded his ability to be 100% effective that season.

Did the Noodle help in his development? Yes, I readily admit that, but I have listed reception after reception were Rice also made the Noodle look pretty damn good.




C: Harvin was a rookie - Wade a proven possession guy. Do you - again - bnelieve taht Harvin would have been OROY had Jackson been throwing to him? Do you think Jackson could bring Harvin's talents screaming to the forefront? Because I know Jackson really brought out the talents of .....well ......ummmm ......Gus Frerotte!!!

Again...refuted.
First, you know my stance on individual awards. They are all garbage.

In the end, would he have had as good of a year? I agree, probably not, but he sure didn't hold the Noodle back. Seems to me the young lad was a prime target if El Syd wasn't covered.

My guess, he had the skills to get open regardless of who was under Center and would have seen his share of throws.


D: You still trying to sell the idea that Sully was head and shoulders better than Birk? My eye!! Sully was good...MAYBE close to as good as Birk the season before...but Sully has a bit of improving to do before he's considered the next Matt Birk. And, FYI, the turnstile was still there...Favre just got rid of the ball quicker.

REFUTED!!!
Nope, you said "Head and Shoulders", I said graded out statistically the same or just slightly below Matt.

Even you would have to admit that the Noodle got alot less pressure up the middle from LB'rs this year.


E: And again you're trying to say that Loadholt was a dominant force? Not really. An upgrade over Cook? Yes...but not a HUGE upgrade...YET. Again, you're overstating the impact that Loadholt had on the line, much as you do with Sullivan. Our line wasn't really that much better in 09 than in 08, but it finally has the POTENTIAL to be. The real difference was having a QB who can snap through teh reads adn get rid of the ball versus a QB who has trademarked the "Deer in headlights" look...

REFUTED.
Show me were I have ever said "Dominant" together with any rook, especially an OLmen.

I think I quantified his play as better than any RT we've had for several years. Show me a RT from the last 10 years that you would rather have than Load right now.


F: Finally, you blathered on in the end about why Favre had his best year ever....again, it was partly the team. But I ask you themn why Jackson hasn't been a statistical force to be reckoned with with VIRTUALLY the same team (Only YOU seem to beleive that we suddenly exploded with talent in 09).
I like how you dodge the question. Are you sure you aren't a lawyer or a politician?


The TRUTH is, Favre is a better QB than Jackson.
Again, 20 years vs 4 years. I hope to all that is holy in this world that he is a better QB.

Anyone who wouldn't agree with that is just silly.

However, coma, you didn't explain why the Noodle, who didn't take the "I'm gonna be better than I have ever been in my 20 years" pill, actually put up his best year ever and even went so far as to say several times how this was the best team he had ever been on.

Pretty lofty comments from the Noodle. Heck, he should know, he's been on alot of teams.


Given virtually the same tools, Favre produced something close to a statistical miracle in 09.
Now we are in the "Virtual World".

LOL, comeon my friend, you know that isn't gonna slide.


Something that Jackson would likely sell his soul to do in ANY year.
Of course he would, just like Sage would, Rodgers would, etc etc etc.


And, in order to validate your position, answer only this question, "If Jackson were to suddenly become the starter right now, would be put up the same numbers or numbers close to what Favre did last season?"
I wouldn't expect him to put up the Noodles numbers. Hell, I don't believe the Noodle will be able to do that agian this year, even with this team.

But I do believe he wouldn't have to be carried by this team this year. I think he has matured enough to actually run the offense, just like he did with the 3's against the other teams 1's last year.



If you can't deliver a convincing "Yes he would" - and we all know you can't - then your entire arguenment is shiite, mostly because you seek to discount Favre entirely as a factor. Especially in the production of Rice and Harvin.
Nope, my entire discussion is that I expect he will play like a 4 year vet, just like I expect the Noodle will play like a 20 year vet.

Is that shiite or reality or just my refusal to live in the "Virtual World" of Caine? :P


The TRUTH is that were Jackson to start right now, we'd see production similar to 08's numbers. Maybe a touch better from time to time, but mostly about the same.
I agree, but I believe they would be just a bit better than you do.


Again, I don't "Ignore" your points Marr... in this particular instance, I flat out disagree with them.

Caine :P
I know, but now I know why......One of us is an optimist, the other well, ......is kindof in the virtual world....
Given virtually . :P

Now we're going to play "Twist the quote out of context" game? By redefining my use of "virtually", you somehjow get to ignore everything I said?

Hmmmm....who does this remind me of?

1: In 08, Berrian played in 16 games...starting 13. He had 48 receptions, and 7 TDs (His most EVER). Maybe he should play hurt more often?

Rice played in 13 games and started 3. So, was he simply hurt all season, or was Jackson unable to utilize him at all? You say it's all Sydney being hurt..I say bull puckey.

2: You claim Birk was - your words - a "Turnstile" at center in '08...then you back track and say that Sullivan was only "just as good" as Birk. Does that mean that Sully was a turnstile too? Or, maybe you've been overstating how bad Birk was in order to create a "point" for you to refute Favre's ability with.......

Hmmm....which is more likely?

3: You proclaim how great Harvin was in comparison to Wade, then reject the OROY award Harvin won when asked if he would have gotten it with Jackson under center? What a crock!!! C'mon, Marrdro. You know you can't duck like that. Or maybe you dodged because the answer is, "No, Jackson wouldn't have been able to use Percy anywhere near as well"...

4: You claim I dodged a question - really? I don't think I did. Was it "Why did Favre have his best year ever"? Simple - he had the luxury of not having to do it all by himself for one of the few times in his career. The combination of a dynamic running game as well as a dominant Defense meant favre could relax a bit. That leads to LESS pushing, which leads to less INT's, etc...

What's Jackson's excuse? He had almost the same team in '08.

5: Then you backtrack and give the "20 year vet versus 4 year vet" excuse? PUUUUHLEASE!!!!!! By that logic, Sage Rosenfels - a TEN year vet - should be whooping ass all over Jackson. Instead, it was a dead heat of incompetent and inconsistent play that prompted Chiller to beg Favre to come back out of retirement.

No, the TRUTH is that Favre has what Jackson doesn't - HOF level talent. And he started displaying it in 1992 - his SECOND year in the NFL - when he displaced an injured Don Majkowski (Who should have been better, because he was a 6 year vet :woohoo: ). Jackson, after FOUR seasons, has displayed flashes of competency, surrounded by long periods of blaaaagh, with occasional bouts of "OHmyGODyouSUCK!!".

6: Yes, one of us is an optimist - loosely translated, that means that one of us has faith that something good will happen, despite having absolutely no evidence to believe so.

I choose to base my opinions on something a bit more substantive than "I sure do hope so!!!"

Caine

Caine
05-17-2010, 12:35 PM
FWIW, I think it would be a riot to hoist a few brews with Marrdro and have this discussion - I really do. Don't take this as a bashing of the person -just of the crap I disagree with...

Marrdro
05-17-2010, 12:47 PM
Rockmolder wrote:

12purplepride28 wrote:

I would quote the specific part but I think it would turn into a mess of a post, but @Marrdro, I don't think Rodgers would sell his soul to have that kind of a year. He had 3 less TDs and 300 more yards, and I'm sure he will only improve.

I would love to jump in on this arguement (debate?) but I have class. Ahh, maybe later.

I like you.
I like him even more. Currently ole 12PP28 is above you on most spreadsheets...... :P

Marrdro
05-17-2010, 12:49 PM
Caine wrote:

FWIW, I think it would be a riot to hoist a few brews with Marrdro and have this discussion - I really do. Don't take this as a bashing of the person -just of the crap I disagree with...
Agree. I discuss and never argue......

I think most (that have met me from this site) will tell you that once you get me going on a football discussion, you can't shut me up.

Unless of course you keep enough beer in front of me so I spend my time sudsing instead of talking..... B)

Rockmolder
05-17-2010, 01:01 PM
Marrdro wrote:

Rockmolder wrote:

12purplepride28 wrote:

I would quote the specific part but I think it would turn into a mess of a post, but @Marrdro, I don't think Rodgers would sell his soul to have that kind of a year. He had 3 less TDs and 300 more yards, and I'm sure he will only improve.

I would love to jump in on this arguement (debate?) but I have class. Ahh, maybe later.

I like you.
I like him even more. Currently ole 12PP28 is above you on most spreadsheets...... :P

Oh, no. That's not good. What privileges did I just lose?

Marrdro
05-17-2010, 02:40 PM
Rockmolder wrote:

Marrdro wrote:

Rockmolder wrote:

12purplepride28 wrote:

I would quote the specific part but I think it would turn into a mess of a post, but @Marrdro, I don't think Rodgers would sell his soul to have that kind of a year. He had 3 less TDs and 300 more yards, and I'm sure he will only improve.

I would love to jump in on this arguement (debate?) but I have class. Ahh, maybe later.

I like you.
I like him even more. Currently ole 12PP28 is above you on most spreadsheets...... :P

Oh, no. That's not good. What privileges did I just lose?
No privileges. You just gotta work a bit harder to get above him, thats all. ;)

AngloVike
05-17-2010, 03:41 PM
Rockmolder wrote:

Marrdro wrote:

Rockmolder wrote:

12purplepride28 wrote:

I would quote the specific part but I think it would turn into a mess of a post, but @Marrdro, I don't think Rodgers would sell his soul to have that kind of a year. He had 3 less TDs and 300 more yards, and I'm sure he will only improve.

I would love to jump in on this arguement (debate?) but I have class. Ahh, maybe later.

I like you.
I like him even more. Currently ole 12PP28 is above you on most spreadsheets...... :P

Oh, no. That's not good. What privileges did I just lose?
you're a Packer fan, how much worse do you want it to be ? :woohoo:

Caine
05-17-2010, 05:05 PM
Marrdro wrote:

Caine wrote:

FWIW, I think it would be a riot to hoist a few brews with Marrdro and have this discussion - I really do. Don't take this as a bashing of the person -just of the crap I disagree with...
Agree. I discuss and never argue......

I think most (that have met me from this site) will tell you that once you get me going on a football discussion, you can't shut me up.

Unless of course you keep enough beer in front of me so I spend my time sudsing instead of talking..... B)

But you still have to go back a page and address my last retort to you...

Caine

ejmat
05-17-2010, 07:12 PM
Marrdro wrote:

Caine wrote:

FWIW, I think it would be a riot to hoist a few brews with Marrdro and have this discussion - I really do. Don't take this as a bashing of the person -just of the crap I disagree with...
Agree. I discuss and never argue......

I think most (that have met me from this site) will tell you that once you get me going on a football discussion, you can't shut me up.

Unless of course you keep enough beer in front of me so I spend my time sudsing instead of talking..... B)

I would like to join this duo for the brewskies and the football gab. :)

Purple Floyd
05-17-2010, 10:38 PM
I find it comical that there would be anyone who would try to compare Jackson to Brett. I have never despised a QB more than Brett all of the years he played for the Pack but at the same time there is no debate that he is better than jackson now and that he was better than Jackson has been at any point in his career.

For that 20 vs. 4 year comparison that just about had me LMAO I guess we should just go and pull stats from #4's early years and see how they look.


Season 1.Lets see, OK not much action in his first season. 4 Attempts and o completions and 2 INT's. Not too good. They should have thrown him under the bus ( Or sent him to Green Bay :lol: )

Season 2. 3200 yards and 18 TD's in 13 games.Hmmmm. Jackson has 21 TD's in his CAREER and brett had 18 in his first 13 games. LOL.And he went to the pro bowl

Season 3. 3300 yards and 19 TD's. So now in 2 seasons he had 37 TD's and 6500 yards of passing compared to 21 TD's and 3600 yards passing in 4 for jackson. OK, I guess jackson is that good after all.Oh yeah, and another Pro Bowl for Brett. How many for Jackson again? Oh yeah.

Season 4. 33 TD's and 3900 yards passing. LOL he had more TD's and more yards in his 4th season than jackson in his career. No Pro Bowl this time though.

So with the 4 year vs 20 comparison shot in the ass you then have to look at how beat up Jacksons WR's were and how bad they were.

Rice was actually healthy in the first game and half of the second game. If you remember we played GB in the opener and jackson stunk it up against GB even though Rice was healthy and wade was healthy.

Berrian was dinged just like he was to start 2009 but he did play. He just had bad stats because jackson wasn't getting him the ball.He went on to have nearly 1000 yards and had the most memorable play in years with that 99 yard dagger from Gus against the Bears.

Rice got hurt against Indy in game 2 but by the jackson's fate was sealed due to his underwhelming performance and he was summarily benched in favor of gus . I wonder how many times brett got benched for poor play in his first 4 seasons?

ejmat
05-18-2010, 08:08 AM
Purple Floyd wrote:

I find it comical that there would be anyone who would try to compare Jackson to Brett. I have never despised a QB more than Brett all of the years he played for the Pack but at the same time there is no debate that he is better than jackson now and that he was better than Jackson has been at any point in his career.

For that 20 vs. 4 year comparison that just about had me LMAO I guess we should just go and pull stats from #4's early years and see how they look.


Season 1.Lets see, OK not much action in his first season. 4 Attempts and o completions and 2 INT's. Not too good. They should have thrown him under the bus ( Or sent him to Green Bay :lol: )

Season 2. 3200 yards and 18 TD's in 13 games.Hmmmm. Jackson has 21 TD's in his CAREER and brett had 18 in his first 13 games. LOL.And he went to the pro bowl

Season 3. 3300 yards and 19 TD's. So now in 2 seasons he had 37 TD's and 6500 yards of passing compared to 21 TD's and 3600 yards passing in 4 for jackson. OK, I guess jackson is that good after all.Oh yeah, and another Pro Bowl for Brett. How many for Jackson again? Oh yeah.

Season 4. 33 TD's and 3900 yards passing. LOL he had more TD's and more yards in his 4th season than jackson in his career. No Pro Bowl this time though.

So with the 4 year vs 20 comparison shot in the ass you then have to look at how beat up Jacksons WR's were and how bad they were.

Rice was actually healthy in the first game and half of the second game. If you remember we played GB in the opener and jackson stunk it up against GB even though Rice was healthy and wade was healthy.

Berrian was dinged just like he was to start 2009 but he did play. He just had bad stats because jackson wasn't getting him the ball.He went on to have nearly 1000 yards and had the most memorable play in years with that 99 yard dagger from Gus against the Bears.

Rice got hurt against Indy in game 2 but by the jackson's fate was sealed due to his underwhelming performance and he was summarily benched in favor of gus . I wonder how many times brett got benched for poor play in his first 4 seasons?

Wait, I know, I know. NONE! :laugh:

I find it comical as well that people keep giving Jackson that leeway. Yes he was a project taken in the 2nd round. But every QB coming out of the college is a project. There is no telling how anyone is going to do. Just because you are a high prospect does not guarantee a good NFL career. NFL and NCAA are two different ball games.

Now I will say Jackson has done better than most QBs in that draft class. I still think he has potential but until he proves he can do it consistently and show the leadership needed to be a successful NFL QB, he will be nothing more than a backup in my mind. Linear graphs or no linear graphs.

i_bleed_purple
05-18-2010, 09:01 AM
ejmat wrote:

Linear graphs or no linear graphs.


:O

NEVER bash the graphs

Prophet
05-18-2010, 09:15 AM
Purple Floyd wrote:

I find it comical that there would be anyone who would try to compare Jackson to Brett. I have never despised a QB more than Brett all of the years he played for the Pack but at the same time there is no debate that he is better than jackson now and that he was better than Jackson has been at any point in his career.

For that 20 vs. 4 year comparison that just about had me LMAO I guess we should just go and pull stats from #4's early years and see how they look.


Season 1.Lets see, OK not much action in his first season. 4 Attempts and o completions and 2 INT's. Not too good. They should have thrown him under the bus ( Or sent him to Green Bay :lol: )

Season 2. 3200 yards and 18 TD's in 13 games.Hmmmm. Jackson has 21 TD's in his CAREER and brett had 18 in his first 13 games. LOL.And he went to the pro bowl

Season 3. 3300 yards and 19 TD's. So now in 2 seasons he had 37 TD's and 6500 yards of passing compared to 21 TD's and 3600 yards passing in 4 for jackson. OK, I guess jackson is that good after all.Oh yeah, and another Pro Bowl for Brett. How many for Jackson again? Oh yeah.

Season 4. 33 TD's and 3900 yards passing. LOL he had more TD's and more yards in his 4th season than jackson in his career. No Pro Bowl this time though.

So with the 4 year vs 20 comparison shot in the ass you then have to look at how beat up Jacksons WR's were and how bad they were.

Rice was actually healthy in the first game and half of the second game. If you remember we played GB in the opener and jackson stunk it up against GB even though Rice was healthy and wade was healthy.

Berrian was dinged just like he was to start 2009 but he did play. He just had bad stats because jackson wasn't getting him the ball.He went on to have nearly 1000 yards and had the most memorable play in years with that 99 yard dagger from Gus against the Bears.

Rice got hurt against Indy in game 2 but by the jackson's fate was sealed due to his underwhelming performance and he was summarily benched in favor of gus . I wonder how many times brett got benched for poor play in his first 4 seasons?

Quit making reasonable comparisons to dispute weak arguments! It will make the panties ride up the ass and leave the ill-informed no recourse other than typing nonsense on anonymous message boards due to their high-pitched voices annoying folks in the 'real' world.

Seasons 1-4
Favre: 10,412 yds, 70 TDs, 53 Ints (49 games)
Jackson: 3,643 yds, 21 TDs, 18 Ints (33 games)

By looking only at their first four seasons it looks like Favre has a [i]slight[i/] advantage. Almost 3x as many yards and >3X as many TDs. Favre shows why he leads the league in INTs, but, interestingly, he lags behind Tarvaris Jackson in career INT%s (Tarvaris 3.3 and Favre 3.2). Another important statistic is how many games have been missed due to injury? Well, I think it is obvious who wins that category in their first four years in the league.

Looking at the first four seasons is interesting. Donít even try to say that it is because Tarvaris has not been starting, he was gifted the starting role in 2006, 2007, and 2008. He could not secure the position. In contrast, Favre was tossed in his second year and never looked back.

Bottom-line is that Jackson is a huge question mark and has only proven two things: (1) He is a great backup QB and (2) the coaching staff does not have confidence in him.

The second point is obvious when you look at what they have done with the QB slot. In 2006 he was a rookie and nobody expected much when he got tossed into the mix. In 2007 he was gifted the starting slot with a bunch of asshat hacks brought in to back him up (decided to let him learn under fire and thought, ah, maybe....). In 2008 he was gifted the starting position and was pulled after two games in favor of another hack who drove the ship to get them into the playoff run. In 2009 they brought in Rosencopter, after an anemic performance in the playoffs by Tarvaris Jackson, for the first supposed QB competition and then went in an all out panic to lick Favreís taint until he signed (knowing that their QB slot was in shambles).

Now, in 2010 we have Favre supposedly coming back, and, if not, we have Tarvaris Jackson as the starter. The pressure is on big time for him. Can he handle it? Will his fragility shine through? I bet against Tarvaris Jackson ever being a consistent starter on any team. The Vikings are built as a solid team and if you canít QB on this team, good luck on many of the other NFL teams. He has played his whole career with the same HC and system and the excuses are used up. Get out and play the game at a high level or be a career backup or walk the plank and haunt some other team.

jargomcfargo
05-18-2010, 10:08 AM
Prophet wrote:

Purple Floyd wrote:

I find it comical that there would be anyone who would try to compare Jackson to Brett. I have never despised a QB more than Brett all of the years he played for the Pack but at the same time there is no debate that he is better than jackson now and that he was better than Jackson has been at any point in his career.

For that 20 vs. 4 year comparison that just about had me LMAO I guess we should just go and pull stats from #4's early years and see how they look.


Season 1.Lets see, OK not much action in his first season. 4 Attempts and o completions and 2 INT's. Not too good. They should have thrown him under the bus ( Or sent him to Green Bay :lol: )

Season 2. 3200 yards and 18 TD's in 13 games.Hmmmm. Jackson has 21 TD's in his CAREER and brett had 18 in his first 13 games. LOL.And he went to the pro bowl

Season 3. 3300 yards and 19 TD's. So now in 2 seasons he had 37 TD's and 6500 yards of passing compared to 21 TD's and 3600 yards passing in 4 for jackson. OK, I guess jackson is that good after all.Oh yeah, and another Pro Bowl for Brett. How many for Jackson again? Oh yeah.

Season 4. 33 TD's and 3900 yards passing. LOL he had more TD's and more yards in his 4th season than jackson in his career. No Pro Bowl this time though.

So with the 4 year vs 20 comparison shot in the ass you then have to look at how beat up Jacksons WR's were and how bad they were.

Rice was actually healthy in the first game and half of the second game. If you remember we played GB in the opener and jackson stunk it up against GB even though Rice was healthy and wade was healthy.

Berrian was dinged just like he was to start 2009 but he did play. He just had bad stats because jackson wasn't getting him the ball.He went on to have nearly 1000 yards and had the most memorable play in years with that 99 yard dagger from Gus against the Bears.

Rice got hurt against Indy in game 2 but by the jackson's fate was sealed due to his underwhelming performance and he was summarily benched in favor of gus . I wonder how many times brett got benched for poor play in his first 4 seasons?

Quit making reasonable comparisons to dispute weak arguments! It will make the panties ride up the ass and leave the ill-informed no recourse other than typing nonsense on anonymous message boards due to their high-pitched voices annoying folks in the 'real' world.

Seasons 1-4
Favre: 10,412 yds, 70 TDs, 53 Ints (49 games)
Jackson: 3,643 yds, 21 TDs, 18 Ints (33 games)

By looking only at their first four seasons it looks like Favre has a [i]slight[i/] advantage. Almost 3x as many yards and >3X as many TDs. Favre shows why he leads the league in INTs, but, interestingly, he lags behind Tarvaris Jackson in career INT%s (Tarvaris 3.3 and Favre 3.2). Another important statistic is how many games have been missed due to injury? Well, I think it is obvious who wins that category in their first four years in the league.

Looking at the first four seasons is interesting. Donít even try to say that it is because Tarvaris has not been starting, he was gifted the starting role in 2006, 2007, and 2008. He could not secure the position. In contrast, Favre was tossed in his second year and never looked back.

Bottom-line is that Jackson is a huge question mark and has only proven two things: (1) He is a great backup QB and (2) the coaching staff does not have confidence in him.

The second point is obvious when you look at what they have done with the QB slot. In 2006 he was a rookie and nobody expected much when he got tossed into the mix. In 2007 he was gifted the starting slot with a bunch of asshat hacks brought in to back him up (decided to let him learn under fire and thought, ah, maybe....). In 2008 he was gifted the starting position and was pulled after two games in favor of another hack who drove the ship to get them into the playoff run. In 2009 they brought in Rosencopter, after an anemic performance in the playoffs by Tarvaris Jackson, for the first supposed QB competition and then went in an all out panic to lick Favreís taint until he signed (knowing that their QB slot was in shambles).

Now, in 2010 we have Favre supposedly coming back, and, if not, we have Tarvaris Jackson as the starter. The pressure is on big time for him. Can he handle it? Will his fragility shine through? I bet against Tarvaris Jackson ever being a consistent starter on any team. The Vikings are built as a solid team and if you canít QB on this team, good luck on many of the other NFL teams. He has played his whole career with the same HC and system and the excuses are used up. Get out and play the game at a high level or be a career backup or walk the plank and haunt some other team.

It's one thing to make a case for Tarvaris, but insane to compare him to one of the best QB's ever, and think that will support your position.
Much safer to compare him to Bollinger or perhaps Gus.

Quick question. If TJ starts this year and stinks the joint up, does Childress walk the plank with him?

Prophet
05-18-2010, 10:15 AM
jargomcfargo wrote:

Prophet wrote:

Purple Floyd wrote:

I find it comical that there would be anyone who would try to compare Jackson to Brett. I have never despised a QB more than Brett all of the years he played for the Pack but at the same time there is no debate that he is better than jackson now and that he was better than Jackson has been at any point in his career.

For that 20 vs. 4 year comparison that just about had me LMAO I guess we should just go and pull stats from #4's early years and see how they look.


Season 1.Lets see, OK not much action in his first season. 4 Attempts and o completions and 2 INT's. Not too good. They should have thrown him under the bus ( Or sent him to Green Bay :lol: )

Season 2. 3200 yards and 18 TD's in 13 games.Hmmmm. Jackson has 21 TD's in his CAREER and brett had 18 in his first 13 games. LOL.And he went to the pro bowl

Season 3. 3300 yards and 19 TD's. So now in 2 seasons he had 37 TD's and 6500 yards of passing compared to 21 TD's and 3600 yards passing in 4 for jackson. OK, I guess jackson is that good after all.Oh yeah, and another Pro Bowl for Brett. How many for Jackson again? Oh yeah.

Season 4. 33 TD's and 3900 yards passing. LOL he had more TD's and more yards in his 4th season than jackson in his career. No Pro Bowl this time though.

So with the 4 year vs 20 comparison shot in the ass you then have to look at how beat up Jacksons WR's were and how bad they were.

Rice was actually healthy in the first game and half of the second game. If you remember we played GB in the opener and jackson stunk it up against GB even though Rice was healthy and wade was healthy.

Berrian was dinged just like he was to start 2009 but he did play. He just had bad stats because jackson wasn't getting him the ball.He went on to have nearly 1000 yards and had the most memorable play in years with that 99 yard dagger from Gus against the Bears.

Rice got hurt against Indy in game 2 but by the jackson's fate was sealed due to his underwhelming performance and he was summarily benched in favor of gus . I wonder how many times brett got benched for poor play in his first 4 seasons?

Quit making reasonable comparisons to dispute weak arguments! It will make the panties ride up the ass and leave the ill-informed no recourse other than typing nonsense on anonymous message boards due to their high-pitched voices annoying folks in the 'real' world.

Seasons 1-4
Favre: 10,412 yds, 70 TDs, 53 Ints (49 games)
Jackson: 3,643 yds, 21 TDs, 18 Ints (33 games)

By looking only at their first four seasons it looks like Favre has a [i]slight[i/] advantage. Almost 3x as many yards and >3X as many TDs. Favre shows why he leads the league in INTs, but, interestingly, he lags behind Tarvaris Jackson in career INT%s (Tarvaris 3.3 and Favre 3.2). Another important statistic is how many games have been missed due to injury? Well, I think it is obvious who wins that category in their first four years in the league.

Looking at the first four seasons is interesting. Donít even try to say that it is because Tarvaris has not been starting, he was gifted the starting role in 2006, 2007, and 2008. He could not secure the position. In contrast, Favre was tossed in his second year and never looked back.

Bottom-line is that Jackson is a huge question mark and has only proven two things: (1) He is a great backup QB and (2) the coaching staff does not have confidence in him.

The second point is obvious when you look at what they have done with the QB slot. In 2006 he was a rookie and nobody expected much when he got tossed into the mix. In 2007 he was gifted the starting slot with a bunch of asshat hacks brought in to back him up (decided to let him learn under fire and thought, ah, maybe....). In 2008 he was gifted the starting position and was pulled after two games in favor of another hack who drove the ship to get them into the playoff run. In 2009 they brought in Rosencopter, after an anemic performance in the playoffs by Tarvaris Jackson, for the first supposed QB competition and then went in an all out panic to lick Favreís taint until he signed (knowing that their QB slot was in shambles).

Now, in 2010 we have Favre supposedly coming back, and, if not, we have Tarvaris Jackson as the starter. The pressure is on big time for him. Can he handle it? Will his fragility shine through? I bet against Tarvaris Jackson ever being a consistent starter on any team. The Vikings are built as a solid team and if you canít QB on this team, good luck on many of the other NFL teams. He has played his whole career with the same HC and system and the excuses are used up. Get out and play the game at a high level or be a career backup or walk the plank and haunt some other team.

It's one thing to make a case for Tarvaris, but insane to compare him to one of the best QB's ever, and think that will support your position.
Much safer to compare him to Bollinger or perhaps Gus.

Quick question. If TJ starts this year and stinks the joint up, does Childress walk the plank with him?

I agree, you would have to make comparisons with a host of QBs during their first four years. But, the asinine comparison continues to be brought up, so, this could at least kill one of those types of comparisons because it is the most 'accurate' way to compare the two.

Regarding Childress walking the plank with TJack if he stinks up the joint, I would say no. A similar comparison would be looking at Jim Haslett and Aaron Brooks. Haslett was trying to build the team around Aaron Brooks and Brooks was a hack. Tarvaris Jackson is a question mark, but, it is obvious that the team is not being built around Tarvaris Jackson's skill-set. The QB situation is not that great, but, the team is. If Tarvaris Jackson starts and stinks it up I do not think it will be the demise of Childress in the same year. However, if he doesn't get that situation resolved he will be on the short-leash. One thing that was readily apparent last year is that the offense performed with an HOF QB running the show. Does the offense require a superhero QB or can someone else run it effectively? I don't know, ask Gus Frerotte.

C Mac D
05-18-2010, 10:26 AM
i_bleed_purple wrote:

ejmat wrote:

Linear graphs or no linear graphs.


:O

NEVER bash the graphs

http://blogs.microsoft.co.il/blogs/tamir/WindowsLiveWriter/TechEdEilatDaytwoIDISAPPOINTED_890A/200488557-001_dc53a697-a8ed-45bf-a3c7-714612295520.jpg

Zeus
05-18-2010, 10:30 AM
jargomcfargo wrote:

Quick question. If TJ starts this year and stinks the joint up, does Childress walk the plank with him?

I suppose that depends on what the team does. If TJ stinks and the team goes 8-8, is that fireable the year after making the NFC Championship?

=Z=

C Mac D
05-18-2010, 10:37 AM
Zeus wrote:

jargomcfargo wrote:

Quick question. If TJ starts this year and stinks the joint up, does Childress walk the plank with him?

I suppose that depends on what the team does. If TJ stinks and the team goes 8-8, is that fireable the year after making the NFC Championship?

=Z=

I think in that situation, TJ walks the plank and Childress gets another Vet in the off-season.

Personally, I think Childress has bought himself AT LEAST two more years of a guaranteed job.

ejmat
05-18-2010, 10:38 AM
C Mac D wrote:

i_bleed_purple wrote:

ejmat wrote:

Linear graphs or no linear graphs.


:O

NEVER bash the graphs

http://blogs.microsoft.co.il/blogs/tamir/WindowsLiveWriter/TechEdEilatDaytwoIDISAPPOINTED_890A/200488557-001_dc53a697-a8ed-45bf-a3c7-714612295520.jpg

LOL CMac. I'm sowwy :laugh: Great pic by the way.

jargomcfargo
05-18-2010, 11:04 AM
Zeus wrote:

jargomcfargo wrote:

Quick question. If TJ starts this year and stinks the joint up, does Childress walk the plank with him?

I suppose that depends on what the team does. If TJ stinks and the team goes 8-8, is that fireable the year after making the NFC Championship?

=Z=

Personally I don't think Childress' career is tied to Jackson's any longer.

I hope Jackson proves all the naysayers wrong, although I wouldn't count on it.

I think Childress stays regardless of what Jackson does.

I was just curious to see what others thought.

12purplepride28
05-18-2010, 11:16 AM
jargomcfargo wrote:

Zeus wrote:

jargomcfargo wrote:

Quick question. If TJ starts this year and stinks the joint up, does Childress walk the plank with him?

I suppose that depends on what the team does. If TJ stinks and the team goes 8-8, is that fireable the year after making the NFC Championship?

=Z=

Personally I don't think Childress' career is tied to Jackson's any longer.

I hope Jackson proves all the naysayers wrong, although I wouldn't count on it.

I think Childress stays regardless of what Jackson does.

I was just curious to see what others thought.

Why wouldn't it be tied to Jackson still? He hasn't done anything to secure the future QB position. Just because we had one almost perfect year with a QB that can only play 1 more year (two according to AP). Jackson is still the "future" of the franchise and as long as that is the case I think Chilly goes with him. At best he should get 1 year after Jackson [most likely] fails.

On a side note, I am a naysayer but I hope I'm proved wrong.

Zeus
05-18-2010, 11:18 AM
12purplepride28 wrote:

On a side note, I am a naysayer but I hope I'm proved wrong.

Too many naysayers around here. We need more positivity.

And you need an avatar. That green thing is entirely too Packerish.

=Z=

jargomcfargo
05-18-2010, 11:44 AM
12purplepride28 wrote:

jargomcfargo wrote:

Zeus wrote:

jargomcfargo wrote:

Quick question. If TJ starts this year and stinks the joint up, does Childress walk the plank with him?

I suppose that depends on what the team does. If TJ stinks and the team goes 8-8, is that fireable the year after making the NFC Championship?

=Z=

Personally I don't think Childress' career is tied to Jackson's any longer.

I hope Jackson proves all the naysayers wrong, although I wouldn't count on it.

I think Childress stays regardless of what Jackson does.

I was just curious to see what others thought.

Why wouldn't it be tied to Jackson still? He hasn't done anything to secure the future QB position. Just because we had one almost perfect year with a QB that can only play 1 more year (two according to AP). Jackson is still the "future" of the franchise and as long as that is the case I think Chilly goes with him. At best he should get 1 year after Jackson [most likely] fails.

On a side note, I am a naysayer but I hope I'm proved wrong.

I think bringing in Favre proves Childress' offense can be a kick ass offense with the right QB.
So even though he may not have found the QB of the future, I think Zygi will allow him more time to find one if necessary.

Should that QB turn out to be TJ, then Childress is an outright genious!

Prophet
05-18-2010, 11:52 AM
jargomcfargo wrote:

12purplepride28 wrote:

jargomcfargo wrote:

Zeus wrote:

jargomcfargo wrote:

Quick question. If TJ starts this year and stinks the joint up, does Childress walk the plank with him?

I suppose that depends on what the team does. If TJ stinks and the team goes 8-8, is that fireable the year after making the NFC Championship?

=Z=

Personally I don't think Childress' career is tied to Jackson's any longer.

I hope Jackson proves all the naysayers wrong, although I wouldn't count on it.

I think Childress stays regardless of what Jackson does.

I was just curious to see what others thought.

Why wouldn't it be tied to Jackson still? He hasn't done anything to secure the future QB position. Just because we had one almost perfect year with a QB that can only play 1 more year (two according to AP). Jackson is still the "future" of the franchise and as long as that is the case I think Chilly goes with him. At best he should get 1 year after Jackson [most likely] fails.

On a side note, I am a naysayer but I hope I'm proved wrong.

I think bringing in Favre proves Childress' offense can be a kick ass offense with the right QB.
So even though he may not have found the QB of the future, I think Zygi will allow him more time to find one if necessary.

Should that QB turn out to be TJ, then Childress is an outright genious!

of the eminem variety.

Marrdro
05-18-2010, 01:12 PM
ejmat wrote:

Marrdro wrote:

Caine wrote:

FWIW, I think it would be a riot to hoist a few brews with Marrdro and have this discussion - I really do. Don't take this as a bashing of the person -just of the crap I disagree with...
Agree. I discuss and never argue......

I think most (that have met me from this site) will tell you that once you get me going on a football discussion, you can't shut me up.

Unless of course you keep enough beer in front of me so I spend my time sudsing instead of talking..... B)

I would like to join this duo for the brewskies and the football gab. :)
You know that you already have a standing invitation my friend.

Marrdro
05-18-2010, 01:14 PM
jargomcfargo wrote:

Zeus wrote:

jargomcfargo wrote:

Quick question. If TJ starts this year and stinks the joint up, does Childress walk the plank with him?

I suppose that depends on what the team does. If TJ stinks and the team goes 8-8, is that fireable the year after making the NFC Championship?

=Z=

Personally I don't think Childress' career is tied to Jackson's any longer.

I hope Jackson proves all the naysayers wrong, although I wouldn't count on it.

I think Childress stays regardless of what Jackson does.

I was just curious to see what others thought.
I never believed it was tied to TJ. The staff has been trying to find a QB since Pep left.

TJ was the 3rd option at QB and is only on this team cause Foley screwed the pooch in the 2006 draft.

Marrdro
05-18-2010, 01:17 PM
Purple Floyd wrote:

I find it comical that there would be anyone who would try to compare Jackson to Brett.
I find it comical that you think that is what we are doing.

When we say 20 vs 4, that is what we mean. It is absolutely stupid to try to say that things should have worked when TJ was in there vs what the Noodle is doing now.

As to your comparison about the early years......might carry a bit more validity if you compared things like OL, WR, etc between the two teams.

i_bleed_purple
05-18-2010, 01:27 PM
Marrdro wrote:

Purple Floyd wrote:

I find it comical that there would be anyone who would try to compare Jackson to Brett.
I find it comical that you think that is what we are doing.

When we say 20 vs 4, that is what we mean. It is absolutely stupid to try to say that things should have worked when TJ was in there vs what the Noodle is doing now.

As to your comparison about the early years......might carry a bit more validity if you compared things like OL, WR, etc between the two teams.

Why don't we compare runningbacks and the number of defenders playing in the box during Favre's first four years while we're at it?

Zeus
05-18-2010, 01:30 PM
Marrdro wrote:

jargomcfargo wrote:

Zeus wrote:

jargomcfargo wrote:

Quick question. If TJ starts this year and stinks the joint up, does Childress walk the plank with him?

I suppose that depends on what the team does. If TJ stinks and the team goes 8-8, is that fireable the year after making the NFC Championship?

Personally I don't think Childress' career is tied to Jackson's any longer.

I hope Jackson proves all the naysayers wrong, although I wouldn't count on it.

I think Childress stays regardless of what Jackson does.

I was just curious to see what others thought.
I never believed it was tied to TJ. The staff has been trying to find a QB since Pep left.

TJ was the 3rd option at QB and is only on this team cause Foley screwed the pooch in the 2006 draft.

Ahhhh, yes, that ol' chestnut. Nothing like the classics to spice up an afternoon. Uncle Marty? Will you tell us the one about the mermaid who got away next?

=Z=

C Mac D
05-18-2010, 01:35 PM
Zeus wrote:

Marrdro wrote:

jargomcfargo wrote:

Zeus wrote:

jargomcfargo wrote:

Quick question. If TJ starts this year and stinks the joint up, does Childress walk the plank with him?

I suppose that depends on what the team does. If TJ stinks and the team goes 8-8, is that fireable the year after making the NFC Championship?

Personally I don't think Childress' career is tied to Jackson's any longer.

I hope Jackson proves all the naysayers wrong, although I wouldn't count on it.

I think Childress stays regardless of what Jackson does.

I was just curious to see what others thought.
I never believed it was tied to TJ. The staff has been trying to find a QB since Pep left.

TJ was the 3rd option at QB and is only on this team cause Foley screwed the pooch in the 2006 draft.

Ahhhh, yes, that ol' chestnut. Nothing like the classics to spice up an afternoon. Uncle Marty? Will you tell us the one about the mermaid who got away next?

=Z=

Jackson has performed better than any other QB in the 2006 draft, Vince Young included. Just throwing that out there.

Zeus
05-18-2010, 01:48 PM
C Mac D wrote:

Jackson has performed better than any other QB in the 2006 draft, Vince Young included. Just throwing that out there.

By what measure?

Young is 26-13 as a starter, Tarvaris is 10-9.

For comparison, Cutlerfuck is 24-29.

Here are all the QBs drafted in 2006 - not an impressive list.

Year Rnd Pick Pos Tm G Cmp Att Yds TD Int Att Yds TD
2006 1 3 Vince Young QB TEN 45 596 1034 6843 32 39 239 1255 12
2006 1 10 Matt Leinart QB ARI 29 340 595 3893 14 20 46 90 2
2006 1 11 Jay Cutler QB DEN 53 1098 1775 12690 81 63 153 596 4
2006 2 49 Kellen Clemens QB NYJ 24 146 282 1680 5 11 44 119 1
2006 2 64 Tarvaris Jackson QB MIN 33 320 545 3643 21 18 112 472 4
2006 3 81 Charlie Whitehurst QB SDG 2 2 13 1
2006 3 85 Brodie Croyle QB KAN 16 173 300 1631 8 8 10 15 0
2006 4 103 Brad Smith QB NYJ 60 2 4 45 0 0 60 468 1
2006 5 148 Ingle Martin QB GNB 1 2 -5 0
2006 5 164 Omar Jacobs QB PIT
2006 6 193 Reggie McNeal QB CIN 7 1 8 0
2006 6 194 Bruce Gradkowski QB TAM 26 279 523 2824 15 16 67 291 0
2006 7 223 D.J. Shockley QB ATL
=Z=

Caine
05-18-2010, 02:43 PM
Marrdro wrote:

jargomcfargo wrote:

Zeus wrote:

jargomcfargo wrote:

Quick question. If TJ starts this year and stinks the joint up, does Childress walk the plank with him?

I suppose that depends on what the team does. If TJ stinks and the team goes 8-8, is that fireable the year after making the NFC Championship?

=Z=

Personally I don't think Childress' career is tied to Jackson's any longer.

I hope Jackson proves all the naysayers wrong, although I wouldn't count on it.

I think Childress stays regardless of what Jackson does.

I was just curious to see what others thought.
I never believed it was tied to TJ. The staff has been trying to find a QB since Pep left.

TJ was the 3rd option at QB and is only on this team cause Foley screwed the pooch in the 2006 draft.

1: They haven't been "trying to find a QB"...they've been trying to validate Jackson as a QB by parading a never ending succession of crappy QB's in trying to get a favorable comparrison (And failing) - they finally caved and got Favre because Chiller's job WAS on the line. After an NFC Championship loss, Chiller has another 2 years for free.

2: Also, Childress isn't tied to Jackson any longer because Chiller lets Zygi "play" with the team. You think Parcells would do that? How about Holmgren? As long as Chiller let's Zygi pretend that he's a "Football Guy" - and the team maintains a relative level of success, Chiller stays.

Caine

i_bleed_purple
05-18-2010, 02:45 PM
Caine wrote:



2: Also, Childress isn't tied to Jackson any longer because Chiller lets Zygi "play" with the team. You think Parcells would do that? How about Holmgren? As long as Chiller let's Zygi pretend that he's a "Football Guy" - and the team maintains a relative level of success, Chiller stays.

Caine

Its funny but true. We'd be much better off if Zygi sat back, and did nothing but write checks.

jargomcfargo
05-18-2010, 03:09 PM
i_bleed_purple wrote:

Caine wrote:



2: Also, Childress isn't tied to Jackson any longer because Chiller lets Zygi "play" with the team. You think Parcells would do that? How about Holmgren? As long as Chiller let's Zygi pretend that he's a "Football Guy" - and the team maintains a relative level of success, Chiller stays.

Caine

Its funny but true. We'd be much better off if Zygi sat back, and did nothing but write checks.

Writing out a check for a real GM would be a good start.

Prophet
05-18-2010, 03:19 PM
jargomcfargo wrote:

i_bleed_purple wrote:

Caine wrote:



2: Also, Childress isn't tied to Jackson any longer because Chiller lets Zygi "play" with the team. You think Parcells would do that? How about Holmgren? As long as Chiller let's Zygi pretend that he's a "Football Guy" - and the team maintains a relative level of success, Chiller stays.

Caine

Its funny but true. We'd be much better off if Zygi sat back, and did nothing but write checks.

Writing out a check for a real GM would be a good start.

Anything that dilutes Rick Spielman's influence gets two thumbs up in my book.

C Mac D
05-18-2010, 03:30 PM
Prophet wrote:

jargomcfargo wrote:

i_bleed_purple wrote:

Caine wrote:



2: Also, Childress isn't tied to Jackson any longer because Chiller lets Zygi "play" with the team. You think Parcells would do that? How about Holmgren? As long as Chiller let's Zygi pretend that he's a "Football Guy" - and the team maintains a relative level of success, Chiller stays.

Caine

Its funny but true. We'd be much better off if Zygi sat back, and did nothing but write checks.

Writing out a check for a real GM would be a good start.

Anything that dilutes Rick Spielman's influence gets two thumbs up in my book.
+1

He completely destroys a team in Miami... then immediately gets another job... and is still chasing the same hack players. (Rosenfels...)

jmcdon00
05-18-2010, 03:37 PM
Caine wrote:

Marrdro wrote:

jargomcfargo wrote:

Zeus wrote:

jargomcfargo wrote:

Quick question. If TJ starts this year and stinks the joint up, does Childress walk the plank with him?

I suppose that depends on what the team does. If TJ stinks and the team goes 8-8, is that fireable the year after making the NFC Championship?

=Z=

Personally I don't think Childress' career is tied to Jackson's any longer.

I hope Jackson proves all the naysayers wrong, although I wouldn't count on it.

I think Childress stays regardless of what Jackson does.

I was just curious to see what others thought.
I never believed it was tied to TJ. The staff has been trying to find a QB since Pep left.

TJ was the 3rd option at QB and is only on this team cause Foley screwed the pooch in the 2006 draft.

1: They haven't been "trying to find a QB"...they've been trying to validate Jackson as a QB by parading a never ending succession of crappy QB's in trying to get a favorable comparrison (And failing) - they finally caved and got Favre because Chiller's job WAS on the line. After an NFC Championship loss, Chiller has another 2 years for free.

2: Also, Childress isn't tied to Jackson any longer because Chiller lets Zygi "play" with the team. You think Parcells would do that? How about Holmgren? As long as Chiller let's Zygi pretend that he's a "Football Guy" - and the team maintains a relative level of success, Chiller stays.

Caine
1. BS. I'm completely convinced Chilly is trying to put the best team together he can. He may be wrong but he's certainly not just looking for scrubs to validate himself. Chilly knows that he will be judged on all the personel moves, not just the 2nd round pick from 4 years ago.

2. Zygi has been playing with the team? I had not heard that what moves are you talking about?
I thought Jerry Jones was very vocal about the team even with parcells, alot more so than Zygi has been.

AngloVike
05-18-2010, 03:50 PM
C Mac D wrote:

Zeus wrote:

jargomcfargo wrote:

Quick question. If TJ starts this year and stinks the joint up, does Childress walk the plank with him?

I suppose that depends on what the team does. If TJ stinks and the team goes 8-8, is that fireable the year after making the NFC Championship?

=Z=

I think in that situation, TJ walks the plank and Childress gets another Vet in the off-season.

Personally, I think Childress has bought himself AT LEAST two more years of a guaranteed job.

excuse me? going from an errant pass and several fumbles from a Superbowl appearance to 8-8 and possibly not making the playoffs and you think he would still get that second year? Somehow I think the fan base alone would be baying for his head, let alone the media and an extremely pissed owner.
That would regardless of whoever the QB would be - just to ensure its not seen as TJ bashing. :)

C Mac D
05-18-2010, 04:01 PM
AngloVike wrote:

C Mac D wrote:

Zeus wrote:

jargomcfargo wrote:

Quick question. If TJ starts this year and stinks the joint up, does Childress walk the plank with him?

I suppose that depends on what the team does. If TJ stinks and the team goes 8-8, is that fireable the year after making the NFC Championship?

=Z=

I think in that situation, TJ walks the plank and Childress gets another Vet in the off-season.

Personally, I think Childress has bought himself AT LEAST two more years of a guaranteed job.

excuse me? going from an errant pass and several fumbles from a Superbowl appearance to 8-8 and possibly not making the playoffs and you think he would still get that second year? Somehow I think the fan base alone would be baying for his head, let alone the media and an extremely pissed owner.
That would regardless of whoever the QB would be - just to ensure its not seen as TJ bashing. :)

I would usually agree with you, but I think it would take a 2-14 year to get Childress fired. Wilf just seems to like him too much.

jmcdon00 wrote:

1. BS. I'm completely convinced Chilly is trying to put the best team together he can. He may be wrong but he's certainly not just looking for scrubs to validate himself. Chilly knows that he will be judged on all the personel moves, not just the 2nd round pick from 4 years ago.

2. Zygi has been playing with the team? I had not heard that what moves are you talking about?
I thought Jerry Jones was very vocal about the team even with parcells, alot more so than Zygi has been.
And can we stop acting like Caine is spewing facts? He simply rights off facts then tries to pass his slanted opinion off as if it's the truth. Just because some like-minded people share his opinion means nothing. He simply cannot look at the overall picture of the entire team and focuses merely on the faults of the QB, while also writing off any stats that go against his argument... then using stats that help his argument. His entire arguments are pretty transparent. The closest he gets to facts are, "Jackson sucked in the Colts game... Jackson sucked in the playoffs..." Yeah, tough to argue facts that (despite that I've posted videos of passes hitting receivers in the numbers, only to have the receivers drop them... Caine had no response to those videos, oddly).

Now, Caine will use this post to say I think Jackson should start over Favre... or Caine will call me a douche... both are the usual Caine response. While I am a douche, I don't think Jackson should start over Favre. Never said that.

The above is all truth. Might be hard to digest, Caine... but you simply don't look at the whole picture and don't really have any valid arguments except for personal opinion.

Zeus
05-18-2010, 04:18 PM
C Mac D wrote:

While I am a douche

QFT.

=Z=

C Mac D
05-18-2010, 04:23 PM
Zeus wrote:

C Mac D wrote:

While I am a douche

QFT.

=Z=

My parent's are sure to point it out every Christmas card.

Prophet
05-18-2010, 04:24 PM
C Mac D wrote:

Zeus wrote:

C Mac D wrote:

While I am a douche

QFT.

=Z=

My parent's are sure to point it out every Christmas card.

I love the holidays.

Zeus
05-18-2010, 04:26 PM
C Mac D wrote:

Zeus wrote:

C Mac D wrote:

While I am a douche

QFT.

My parent's are sure to point it out every Christmas card.

Your parent's what?

=Z=

C Mac D
05-18-2010, 04:28 PM
Zeus wrote:

C Mac D wrote:

Zeus wrote:

C Mac D wrote:

While I am a douche

QFT.

My parent's are sure to point it out every Christmas card.

Your parent's what?

=Z=

Their downright nasty sarcasm. It runs in the family.

expackerfan
05-18-2010, 09:26 PM
Expacker fan because Ted took a team that went to the NFC title game and turned it into a 6-10 team the next year. your offensive line is better because of Brett gitting to ball out quickly.Plus he makes the whole team better becacuse of how he plays the game and the rest of the team wants to play up to his level dont think TJac going to get that in the huddle.one more thing when the say Lambaeu is this great place to watch a game and that Packer fans are the greatest in the world Dont believe it.Had a geat time at the playoff win over dallas cant even stand up at lambaeu See you guys Nov 21

12purplepride28
05-18-2010, 09:40 PM
expackerfan wrote:

Expacker fan because Ted took a team that went to the NFC title game and turned it into a 6-10 team the next year. your offensive line is better because of Brett gitting to ball out quickly.Plus he makes the whole team better becacuse of how he plays the game and the rest of the team wants to play up to his level dont think TJac going to get that in the huddle.one more thing when the say Lambaeu is this great place to watch a game and that Packer fans are the greatest in the world Dont believe it.Had a geat time at the playoff win over dallas cant even stand up at lambaeu See you guys Nov 21

He made the right decision and everyone can see it. Aaron Rodgers is an excellent QB, Favre had you guys in limbo, the pukers needed out of it. The right decision was made and if you can't see it then you were a Favre fan, not a Packer fan.

Marrdro
05-19-2010, 07:58 AM
Caine wrote:


1: They haven't been "trying to find a QB"...they've been trying to validate Jackson as a QB by parading a never ending succession of crappy QB's in trying to get a favorable comparrison (And failing) - they finally caved and got Favre because Chiller's job WAS on the line. After an NFC Championship loss, Chiller has another 2 years for free.

Finally caved and got the Noodle? Do I have to pull up that QB thread again.

It lays out all the QB's that have been available/not available and what/who the team brought in via the draft as well as the FA market.

Suffice it to say, I would be the Vikes have made more QB moves that most NFL teams over this regimes brief tenure.



2: Also, Childress isn't tied to Jackson any longer because Chiller lets Zygi "play" with the team. You think Parcells would do that? How about Holmgren? As long as Chiller let's Zygi pretend that he's a "Football Guy" - and the team maintains a relative level of success, Chiller stays.

Caine
You mention that a few times of late. To what degree do you actually think the ownership group actually mucks with the roster.

I actually haven't seen anything that says he has other that back in the first year after the Foley incident.

i_bleed_purple
05-19-2010, 08:12 AM
Marrdro wrote:


Suffice it to say, I would be the Vikes have made more QB moves that most NFL teams over this regimes brief tenure.



we've signed two starters and 3 backups (Bootydoesn't count)

We've never gone after a legitimate starting calibre QB othe rthan Favre. So yes, we've gone after a few, but at the end of the day, it got us about what the FO expected it to: Nothing.

Caine
05-19-2010, 10:24 AM
C Mac D wrote:


And can we stop acting like Caine is spewing facts? He simply rights off facts then tries to pass his slanted opinion off as if it's the truth.

First, I think it's pretty clear that the above post was my opinion. And while there are a plethora of facts to support my opinion, I didn't cite any. I do find it rather ironic that you chose to dig waaaay back into the thread just to come after me...it's almost like I have a stalker...


Just because some like-minded people share his opinion means nothing.

Yup...just because the vast majority of the football watching planet agree with me is absolutely NO reason to think I might be remotely right. C Mac, on the other hand, has the agreement of the other handful of Jackson apologists to support his point of view...a much better bandwagon to jump on...


He simply cannot look at the overall picture of the entire team and focuses merely on the faults of the QB, while also writing off any stats that go against his argument... then using stats that help his argument. His entire arguments are pretty transparent. The closest he gets to facts are, "Jackson sucked in the Colts game... Jackson sucked in the playoffs..." Yeah, tough to argue facts that (despite that I've posted videos of passes hitting receivers in the numbers, only to have the receivers drop them... Caine had no response to those videos, oddly).

It seems to me that in this particular instance the question pertains specifically TO the Quarterback - which would be why I focused on that position... Funny how I do that...stay "On Topic"...you should try it sometime.

As for writing off stats:

1: I have refuted "Stats in a vacuum" and have filled in the rest of the picture when you have tried to convince us of Jackson's greatness - like his 110 QB rating last season (He must have just missed the Pro Bowl with numbers like that...).

2: As for Jackson's "drops", you try and sell it like every incompletion he's charged with was a drop. The truth is, there was one drop in the FIRST QUARTER of the Colts game that should have been TD - but he failed to move the team appreciably for the rest of the game too (Funny how you conveniently forget that tidbit). Point is, drops played a very small role in Jackon's overall play...despite the fact taht you try and make it a linchpin argument (And fail)



Now, Caine will use this post to say I think Jackson should start over Favre... or Caine will call me a douche... both are the usual Caine response. While I am a douche, I don't think Jackson should start over Favre. Never said that.

1: I haven't yet seen you post that Jackson should start over Favre, so why would I say that? Ohhhhhh...I know why you're saying that. You're accusing ME of twisting words out of context and assaulting the original poster with preposterous accusations then claiming superiority based upon incidents which never occurred...

So sorry to disappoint, but the only Poster on PPO who actually does that with consistency and regularity would be....you, C Mac. It's sort of your trademark. Sort of like you JUST DID.

2: And you were called a douche after implying I was racist. The funny part is, I haven't ever written anything that could even remotely considered racist, yet the evidence of you being a douche is overwhelming.

I guess you simply don't like people responding with fact based assertions after you post made up drivel...


The above is all truth. Might be hard to digest, Caine... but you simply don't look at the whole picture and don't really have any valid arguments except for personal opinion.

No, the above is all your personal, and very twisted, opinion. It isn't hard to digest, because - like all crap - it simply gets tossed out. You see, there are 5 people in the world whose opinions I give a shit about...and you aren't on that list.

When it comes to "whole picture", I think my track record on that is far superior to yours...you are quite well known for taking single elements out of context, twisting them to mean something unrelated to the original post, then throwing them back in the face of the original poster. Something I find it hilarious that you would accuse ME of doing - despite thte FACT that I NEVER do.

In fact, almost every negative accusation you level towards me is a thousand times more accurate if directed towards YOU. I find it hilarious when you try and damn me for YOUR attributes...despite the fact that I don't share them.

But thanks for playing...

Caine

C Mac D
05-19-2010, 10:49 AM
Caine wrote:

C Mac D wrote:


And can we stop acting like Caine is spewing facts? He simply rights off facts then tries to pass his slanted opinion off as if it's the truth.

First, I think it's pretty clear that the above post was my opinion. And while there are a plethora of facts to support my opinion, I didn't cite any. I do find it rather ironic that you chose to dig waaaay back into the thread just to come after me...it's almost like I have a stalker...


Just because some like-minded people share his opinion means nothing.

Yup...just because the vast majority of the football watching planet agree with me is absolutely NO reason to think I might be remotely right. C Mac, on the other hand, has the agreement of the other handful of Jackson apologists to support his point of view...a much better bandwagon to jump on...


He simply cannot look at the overall picture of the entire team and focuses merely on the faults of the QB, while also writing off any stats that go against his argument... then using stats that help his argument. His entire arguments are pretty transparent. The closest he gets to facts are, "Jackson sucked in the Colts game... Jackson sucked in the playoffs..." Yeah, tough to argue facts that (despite that I've posted videos of passes hitting receivers in the numbers, only to have the receivers drop them... Caine had no response to those videos, oddly).

It seems to me that in this particular instance the question pertains specifically TO the Quarterback - which would be why I focused on that position... Funny how I do that...stay "On Topic"...you should try it sometime.

As for writing off stats:

1: I have refuted "Stats in a vacuum" and have filled in the rest of the picture when you have tried to convince us of Jackson's greatness - like his 110 QB rating last season (He must have just missed the Pro Bowl with numbers like that...).

2: As for Jackson's "drops", you try and sell it like every incompletion he's charged with was a drop. The truth is, there was one drop in the FIRST QUARTER of the Colts game that should have been TD - but he failed to move the team appreciably for the rest of the game too (Funny how you conveniently forget that tidbit). Point is, drops played a very small role in Jackon's overall play...despite the fact taht you try and make it a linchpin argument (And fail)



Now, Caine will use this post to say I think Jackson should start over Favre... or Caine will call me a douche... both are the usual Caine response. While I am a douche, I don't think Jackson should start over Favre. Never said that.

1: I haven't yet seen you post that Jackson should start over Favre, so why would I say that? Ohhhhhh...I know why you're saying that. You're accusing ME of twisting words out of context and assaulting the original poster with preposterous accusations then claiming superiority based upon incidents which never occurred...

So sorry to disappoint, but the only Poster on PPO who actually does that with consistency and regularity would be....you, C Mac. It's sort of your trademark. Sort of like you JUST DID.

2: And you were called a douche after implying I was racist. The funny part is, I haven't ever written anything that could even remotely considered racist, yet the evidence of you being a douche is overwhelming.

I guess you simply don't like people responding with fact based assertions after you post made up drivel...


The above is all truth. Might be hard to digest, Caine... but you simply don't look at the whole picture and don't really have any valid arguments except for personal opinion.

No, the above is all your personal, and very twisted, opinion. It isn't hard to digest, because - like all crap - it simply gets tossed out. You see, there are 5 people in the world whose opinions I give a shit about...and you aren't on that list.

When it comes to "whole picture", I think my track record on that is far superior to yours...you are quite well known for taking single elements out of context, twisting them to mean something unrelated to the original post, then throwing them back in the face of the original poster. Something I find it hilarious that you would accuse ME of doing - despite thte FACT that I NEVER do.

In fact, almost every negative accusation you level towards me is a thousand times more accurate if directed towards YOU. I find it hilarious when you try and damn me for YOUR attributes...despite the fact that I don't share them.

But thanks for playing...

Caine

I'm sorry. You're not correct. I've shown countless videos of dropped balls, failed blocks and other mistakes made by the team which you always attribute to Jackson.

You simply push those stats, videos and facts aside and restate your opinion that Jackson sucks. That's it, plain and simple. The people that agree with you are the same people that said Rosenfels would be our starter last season. Congrats on that.

Wow, look at that. I didn't even need to take 20 paragraphs to attempt to conceptualize or back-pedal.


-Your Stalker

http://www.lifespy.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/03/kissmark.jpg

tarkenton10
05-19-2010, 11:29 AM
Caine wrote:

C Mac D wrote:


And can we stop acting like Caine is spewing facts? He simply rights off facts then tries to pass his slanted opinion off as if it's the truth.

First, I think it's pretty clear that the above post was my opinion. And while there are a plethora of facts to support my opinion, I didn't cite any. I do find it rather ironic that you chose to dig waaaay back into the thread just to come after me...it's almost like I have a stalker...


Just because some like-minded people share his opinion means nothing.

Yup...just because the vast majority of the football watching planet agree with me is absolutely NO reason to think I might be remotely right. C Mac, on the other hand, has the agreement of the other handful of Jackson apologists to support his point of view...a much better bandwagon to jump on...


He simply cannot look at the overall picture of the entire team and focuses merely on the faults of the QB, while also writing off any stats that go against his argument... then using stats that help his argument. His entire arguments are pretty transparent. The closest he gets to facts are, "Jackson sucked in the Colts game... Jackson sucked in the playoffs..." Yeah, tough to argue facts that (despite that I've posted videos of passes hitting receivers in the numbers, only to have the receivers drop them... Caine had no response to those videos, oddly).

It seems to me that in this particular instance the question pertains specifically TO the Quarterback - which would be why I focused on that position... Funny how I do that...stay "On Topic"...you should try it sometime.

As for writing off stats:

1: I have refuted "Stats in a vacuum" and have filled in the rest of the picture when you have tried to convince us of Jackson's greatness - like his 110 QB rating last season (He must have just missed the Pro Bowl with numbers like that...).

2: As for Jackson's "drops", you try and sell it like every incompletion he's charged with was a drop. The truth is, there was one drop in the FIRST QUARTER of the Colts game that should have been TD - but he failed to move the team appreciably for the rest of the game too (Funny how you conveniently forget that tidbit). Point is, drops played a very small role in Jackon's overall play...despite the fact taht you try and make it a linchpin argument (And fail)



Now, Caine will use this post to say I think Jackson should start over Favre... or Caine will call me a douche... both are the usual Caine response. While I am a douche, I don't think Jackson should start over Favre. Never said that.

1: I haven't yet seen you post that Jackson should start over Favre, so why would I say that? Ohhhhhh...I know why you're saying that. You're accusing ME of twisting words out of context and assaulting the original poster with preposterous accusations then claiming superiority based upon incidents which never occurred...

So sorry to disappoint, but the only Poster on PPO who actually does that with consistency and regularity would be....you, C Mac. It's sort of your trademark. Sort of like you JUST DID.

2: And you were called a douche after implying I was racist. The funny part is, I haven't ever written anything that could even remotely considered racist, yet the evidence of you being a douche is overwhelming.

I guess you simply don't like people responding with fact based assertions after you post made up drivel...


The above is all truth. Might be hard to digest, Caine... but you simply don't look at the whole picture and don't really have any valid arguments except for personal opinion.

No, the above is all your personal, and very twisted, opinion. It isn't hard to digest, because - like all crap - it simply gets tossed out. You see, there are 5 people in the world whose opinions I give a shit about...and you aren't on that list.

When it comes to "whole picture", I think my track record on that is far superior to yours...you are quite well known for taking single elements out of context, twisting them to mean something unrelated to the original post, then throwing them back in the face of the original poster. Something I find it hilarious that you would accuse ME of doing - despite thte FACT that I NEVER do.

In fact, almost every negative accusation you level towards me is a thousand times more accurate if directed towards YOU. I find it hilarious when you try and damn me for YOUR attributes...despite the fact that I don't share them.

But thanks for playing...

Caine

I'm with you Caine! He called me a racist too. Just because we don't like TJ. He never asked me about any other black QB, like Warrem Moon. I thought he was a great Viking QB. Never asked me what I thought of McNabb but I don't like one QB who I don't think played well he paints a wide brush over my opinions. Now I hate every black person on this planet, which is what he is saying by calling me that. I am sure he didn't like the way Brad Johnson played he must be a racist, he hates white people.

Zeus
05-19-2010, 11:31 AM
http://cdn3.knowyourmeme.com/i/4592/original/GodwinsLaw.jpg

=Z=

C Mac D
05-19-2010, 11:35 AM
tarkenton10 wrote:

Caine wrote:

C Mac D wrote:


And can we stop acting like Caine is spewing facts? He simply rights off facts then tries to pass his slanted opinion off as if it's the truth.

First, I think it's pretty clear that the above post was my opinion. And while there are a plethora of facts to support my opinion, I didn't cite any. I do find it rather ironic that you chose to dig waaaay back into the thread just to come after me...it's almost like I have a stalker...


Just because some like-minded people share his opinion means nothing.

Yup...just because the vast majority of the football watching planet agree with me is absolutely NO reason to think I might be remotely right. C Mac, on the other hand, has the agreement of the other handful of Jackson apologists to support his point of view...a much better bandwagon to jump on...


He simply cannot look at the overall picture of the entire team and focuses merely on the faults of the QB, while also writing off any stats that go against his argument... then using stats that help his argument. His entire arguments are pretty transparent. The closest he gets to facts are, "Jackson sucked in the Colts game... Jackson sucked in the playoffs..." Yeah, tough to argue facts that (despite that I've posted videos of passes hitting receivers in the numbers, only to have the receivers drop them... Caine had no response to those videos, oddly).

It seems to me that in this particular instance the question pertains specifically TO the Quarterback - which would be why I focused on that position... Funny how I do that...stay "On Topic"...you should try it sometime.

As for writing off stats:

1: I have refuted "Stats in a vacuum" and have filled in the rest of the picture when you have tried to convince us of Jackson's greatness - like his 110 QB rating last season (He must have just missed the Pro Bowl with numbers like that...).

2: As for Jackson's "drops", you try and sell it like every incompletion he's charged with was a drop. The truth is, there was one drop in the FIRST QUARTER of the Colts game that should have been TD - but he failed to move the team appreciably for the rest of the game too (Funny how you conveniently forget that tidbit). Point is, drops played a very small role in Jackon's overall play...despite the fact taht you try and make it a linchpin argument (And fail)



Now, Caine will use this post to say I think Jackson should start over Favre... or Caine will call me a douche... both are the usual Caine response. While I am a douche, I don't think Jackson should start over Favre. Never said that.

1: I haven't yet seen you post that Jackson should start over Favre, so why would I say that? Ohhhhhh...I know why you're saying that. You're accusing ME of twisting words out of context and assaulting the original poster with preposterous accusations then claiming superiority based upon incidents which never occurred...

So sorry to disappoint, but the only Poster on PPO who actually does that with consistency and regularity would be....you, C Mac. It's sort of your trademark. Sort of like you JUST DID.

2: And you were called a douche after implying I was racist. The funny part is, I haven't ever written anything that could even remotely considered racist, yet the evidence of you being a douche is overwhelming.

I guess you simply don't like people responding with fact based assertions after you post made up drivel...


The above is all truth. Might be hard to digest, Caine... but you simply don't look at the whole picture and don't really have any valid arguments except for personal opinion.

No, the above is all your personal, and very twisted, opinion. It isn't hard to digest, because - like all crap - it simply gets tossed out. You see, there are 5 people in the world whose opinions I give a shit about...and you aren't on that list.

When it comes to "whole picture", I think my track record on that is far superior to yours...you are quite well known for taking single elements out of context, twisting them to mean something unrelated to the original post, then throwing them back in the face of the original poster. Something I find it hilarious that you would accuse ME of doing - despite thte FACT that I NEVER do.

In fact, almost every negative accusation you level towards me is a thousand times more accurate if directed towards YOU. I find it hilarious when you try and damn me for YOUR attributes...despite the fact that I don't share them.

But thanks for playing...

Caine

I'm with you Caine! He called me a racist too. Just because we don't like TJ. He never asked me about any other black QB, like Warrem Moon. I thought he was a great Viking QB. Never asked me what I thought of McNabb but I don't like one QB who I don't think played well he paints a wide brush over my opinions. Now I hate every black person on this planet, which is what he is saying by calling me that. I am sure he didn't like the way Brad Johnson played he must be a racist, he hates white people.

No, I meant that for Caine, not you.

My opinion of Caine has developed through various conversations, not just his opinion of Jackson.

Caine
05-19-2010, 11:36 AM
C Mac D wrote:

Caine wrote:

C Mac D wrote:


And can we stop acting like Caine is spewing facts? He simply rights off facts then tries to pass his slanted opinion off as if it's the truth.

First, I think it's pretty clear that the above post was my opinion. And while there are a plethora of facts to support my opinion, I didn't cite any. I do find it rather ironic that you chose to dig waaaay back into the thread just to come after me...it's almost like I have a stalker...


Just because some like-minded people share his opinion means nothing.

Yup...just because the vast majority of the football watching planet agree with me is absolutely NO reason to think I might be remotely right. C Mac, on the other hand, has the agreement of the other handful of Jackson apologists to support his point of view...a much better bandwagon to jump on...


He simply cannot look at the overall picture of the entire team and focuses merely on the faults of the QB, while also writing off any stats that go against his argument... then using stats that help his argument. His entire arguments are pretty transparent. The closest he gets to facts are, "Jackson sucked in the Colts game... Jackson sucked in the playoffs..." Yeah, tough to argue facts that (despite that I've posted videos of passes hitting receivers in the numbers, only to have the receivers drop them... Caine had no response to those videos, oddly).

It seems to me that in this particular instance the question pertains specifically TO the Quarterback - which would be why I focused on that position... Funny how I do that...stay "On Topic"...you should try it sometime.

As for writing off stats:

1: I have refuted "Stats in a vacuum" and have filled in the rest of the picture when you have tried to convince us of Jackson's greatness - like his 110 QB rating last season (He must have just missed the Pro Bowl with numbers like that...).

2: As for Jackson's "drops", you try and sell it like every incompletion he's charged with was a drop. The truth is, there was one drop in the FIRST QUARTER of the Colts game that should have been TD - but he failed to move the team appreciably for the rest of the game too (Funny how you conveniently forget that tidbit). Point is, drops played a very small role in Jackon's overall play...despite the fact taht you try and make it a linchpin argument (And fail)



Now, Caine will use this post to say I think Jackson should start over Favre... or Caine will call me a douche... both are the usual Caine response. While I am a douche, I don't think Jackson should start over Favre. Never said that.

1: I haven't yet seen you post that Jackson should start over Favre, so why would I say that? Ohhhhhh...I know why you're saying that. You're accusing ME of twisting words out of context and assaulting the original poster with preposterous accusations then claiming superiority based upon incidents which never occurred...

So sorry to disappoint, but the only Poster on PPO who actually does that with consistency and regularity would be....you, C Mac. It's sort of your trademark. Sort of like you JUST DID.

2: And you were called a douche after implying I was racist. The funny part is, I haven't ever written anything that could even remotely considered racist, yet the evidence of you being a douche is overwhelming.

I guess you simply don't like people responding with fact based assertions after you post made up drivel...


The above is all truth. Might be hard to digest, Caine... but you simply don't look at the whole picture and don't really have any valid arguments except for personal opinion.

No, the above is all your personal, and very twisted, opinion. It isn't hard to digest, because - like all crap - it simply gets tossed out. You see, there are 5 people in the world whose opinions I give a shit about...and you aren't on that list.

When it comes to "whole picture", I think my track record on that is far superior to yours...you are quite well known for taking single elements out of context, twisting them to mean something unrelated to the original post, then throwing them back in the face of the original poster. Something I find it hilarious that you would accuse ME of doing - despite thte FACT that I NEVER do.

In fact, almost every negative accusation you level towards me is a thousand times more accurate if directed towards YOU. I find it hilarious when you try and damn me for YOUR attributes...despite the fact that I don't share them.

But thanks for playing...

Caine

I'm sorry. You're not correct. I've shown countless videos of dropped balls, failed blocks and other mistakes made by the team which you always attribute to Jackson.

You simply push those stats, videos and facts aside and restate your opinion that Jackson sucks. That's it, plain and simple. The people that agree with you are the same people that said Rosenfels would be our starter last season. Congrats on that.

Wow, look at that. I didn't even need to take 20 paragraphs to attempt to conceptualize or back-pedal.


-Your Stalker

http://www.lifespy.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/03/kissmark.jpg

You also failed to readdress the reversal of the accusations you attempted to level towards me about manufacturing information, name calling, and taking elements out of context - but that's to be expected because you didn't have a leg to stand on there either...

You're absolutely right about one thing - you are sorry. I don't recall "countless" videos, I recall a few. Those few do NOT vindicate Jackson for the VAST majority of his poor plays, they simply negate...well...a few. And there's the rub. I don't habitually fail to attribute other peoples errors to those who make them - but neither do I allow myself to simply wipe away everything for the sake of a few exceptions. A practice you seem quite enamored of.

As for my "conceptualizing", perhaps you should. Of course, to do so you'd have to stick to relevant facts and stay on topic - something you're not real good at.

And Back-pedaling? Where? Seems to me I have yet to do so.

You, on the other hand....

Caine

Caine
05-19-2010, 11:43 AM
C Mac D wrote:

tarkenton10 wrote:

Caine wrote:

C Mac D wrote:


And can we stop acting like Caine is spewing facts? He simply rights off facts then tries to pass his slanted opinion off as if it's the truth.

First, I think it's pretty clear that the above post was my opinion. And while there are a plethora of facts to support my opinion, I didn't cite any. I do find it rather ironic that you chose to dig waaaay back into the thread just to come after me...it's almost like I have a stalker...


Just because some like-minded people share his opinion means nothing.

Yup...just because the vast majority of the football watching planet agree with me is absolutely NO reason to think I might be remotely right. C Mac, on the other hand, has the agreement of the other handful of Jackson apologists to support his point of view...a much better bandwagon to jump on...


He simply cannot look at the overall picture of the entire team and focuses merely on the faults of the QB, while also writing off any stats that go against his argument... then using stats that help his argument. His entire arguments are pretty transparent. The closest he gets to facts are, "Jackson sucked in the Colts game... Jackson sucked in the playoffs..." Yeah, tough to argue facts that (despite that I've posted videos of passes hitting receivers in the numbers, only to have the receivers drop them... Caine had no response to those videos, oddly).

It seems to me that in this particular instance the question pertains specifically TO the Quarterback - which would be why I focused on that position... Funny how I do that...stay "On Topic"...you should try it sometime.

As for writing off stats:

1: I have refuted "Stats in a vacuum" and have filled in the rest of the picture when you have tried to convince us of Jackson's greatness - like his 110 QB rating last season (He must have just missed the Pro Bowl with numbers like that...).

2: As for Jackson's "drops", you try and sell it like every incompletion he's charged with was a drop. The truth is, there was one drop in the FIRST QUARTER of the Colts game that should have been TD - but he failed to move the team appreciably for the rest of the game too (Funny how you conveniently forget that tidbit). Point is, drops played a very small role in Jackon's overall play...despite the fact taht you try and make it a linchpin argument (And fail)



Now, Caine will use this post to say I think Jackson should start over Favre... or Caine will call me a douche... both are the usual Caine response. While I am a douche, I don't think Jackson should start over Favre. Never said that.

1: I haven't yet seen you post that Jackson should start over Favre, so why would I say that? Ohhhhhh...I know why you're saying that. You're accusing ME of twisting words out of context and assaulting the original poster with preposterous accusations then claiming superiority based upon incidents which never occurred...

So sorry to disappoint, but the only Poster on PPO who actually does that with consistency and regularity would be....you, C Mac. It's sort of your trademark. Sort of like you JUST DID.

2: And you were called a douche after implying I was racist. The funny part is, I haven't ever written anything that could even remotely considered racist, yet the evidence of you being a douche is overwhelming.

I guess you simply don't like people responding with fact based assertions after you post made up drivel...


The above is all truth. Might be hard to digest, Caine... but you simply don't look at the whole picture and don't really have any valid arguments except for personal opinion.

No, the above is all your personal, and very twisted, opinion. It isn't hard to digest, because - like all crap - it simply gets tossed out. You see, there are 5 people in the world whose opinions I give a shit about...and you aren't on that list.

When it comes to "whole picture", I think my track record on that is far superior to yours...you are quite well known for taking single elements out of context, twisting them to mean something unrelated to the original post, then throwing them back in the face of the original poster. Something I find it hilarious that you would accuse ME of doing - despite thte FACT that I NEVER do.

In fact, almost every negative accusation you level towards me is a thousand times more accurate if directed towards YOU. I find it hilarious when you try and damn me for YOUR attributes...despite the fact that I don't share them.

But thanks for playing...

Caine

I'm with you Caine! He called me a racist too. Just because we don't like TJ. He never asked me about any other black QB, like Warrem Moon. I thought he was a great Viking QB. Never asked me what I thought of McNabb but I don't like one QB who I don't think played well he paints a wide brush over my opinions. Now I hate every black person on this planet, which is what he is saying by calling me that. I am sure he didn't like the way Brad Johnson played he must be a racist, he hates white people.

No, I meant that for Caine, not you.

My opinion of Caine has developed through various conversations, not just his opinion of Jackson.

Your opinion of me developed when we disagreed over whether or not a police officer should taser an 80 year old woman.

See, during that debate, I presented police operating procedure, level of force explanation, public and personal safety guidelines, and the rest of the relevant data needed to judge the situation from the Police officers POV - all based upon my degree in Criminal Justice...C Mac couldn't get past the idea that it was an Old lady.

That's where his derisive tone and name calling began...and it has continued unabated since. I RECENTLY (about 1-2 weeks ago) finally tired of his disingenuous ways and called him a douche - a title he has more than earned - and he now tries to spin that as ME being the aggressor and him the victim, despite the fact that no one who has been on these boards for more than 3 months would ever agree with him.

Now he back-pedals...something he accused ME of...when others call him out. How absolutely revealing that is.

Caine

C Mac D
05-19-2010, 11:45 AM
Caine wrote:

C Mac D wrote:

tarkenton10 wrote:

Caine wrote:

C Mac D wrote:


And can we stop acting like Caine is spewing facts? He simply rights off facts then tries to pass his slanted opinion off as if it's the truth.

First, I think it's pretty clear that the above post was my opinion. And while there are a plethora of facts to support my opinion, I didn't cite any. I do find it rather ironic that you chose to dig waaaay back into the thread just to come after me...it's almost like I have a stalker...


Just because some like-minded people share his opinion means nothing.

Yup...just because the vast majority of the football watching planet agree with me is absolutely NO reason to think I might be remotely right. C Mac, on the other hand, has the agreement of the other handful of Jackson apologists to support his point of view...a much better bandwagon to jump on...


He simply cannot look at the overall picture of the entire team and focuses merely on the faults of the QB, while also writing off any stats that go against his argument... then using stats that help his argument. His entire arguments are pretty transparent. The closest he gets to facts are, "Jackson sucked in the Colts game... Jackson sucked in the playoffs..." Yeah, tough to argue facts that (despite that I've posted videos of passes hitting receivers in the numbers, only to have the receivers drop them... Caine had no response to those videos, oddly).

It seems to me that in this particular instance the question pertains specifically TO the Quarterback - which would be why I focused on that position... Funny how I do that...stay "On Topic"...you should try it sometime.

As for writing off stats:

1: I have refuted "Stats in a vacuum" and have filled in the rest of the picture when you have tried to convince us of Jackson's greatness - like his 110 QB rating last season (He must have just missed the Pro Bowl with numbers like that...).

2: As for Jackson's "drops", you try and sell it like every incompletion he's charged with was a drop. The truth is, there was one drop in the FIRST QUARTER of the Colts game that should have been TD - but he failed to move the team appreciably for the rest of the game too (Funny how you conveniently forget that tidbit). Point is, drops played a very small role in Jackon's overall play...despite the fact taht you try and make it a linchpin argument (And fail)



Now, Caine will use this post to say I think Jackson should start over Favre... or Caine will call me a douche... both are the usual Caine response. While I am a douche, I don't think Jackson should start over Favre. Never said that.

1: I haven't yet seen you post that Jackson should start over Favre, so why would I say that? Ohhhhhh...I know why you're saying that. You're accusing ME of twisting words out of context and assaulting the original poster with preposterous accusations then claiming superiority based upon incidents which never occurred...

So sorry to disappoint, but the only Poster on PPO who actually does that with consistency and regularity would be....you, C Mac. It's sort of your trademark. Sort of like you JUST DID.

2: And you were called a douche after implying I was racist. The funny part is, I haven't ever written anything that could even remotely considered racist, yet the evidence of you being a douche is overwhelming.

I guess you simply don't like people responding with fact based assertions after you post made up drivel...


The above is all truth. Might be hard to digest, Caine... but you simply don't look at the whole picture and don't really have any valid arguments except for personal opinion.

No, the above is all your personal, and very twisted, opinion. It isn't hard to digest, because - like all crap - it simply gets tossed out. You see, there are 5 people in the world whose opinions I give a shit about...and you aren't on that list.

When it comes to "whole picture", I think my track record on that is far superior to yours...you are quite well known for taking single elements out of context, twisting them to mean something unrelated to the original post, then throwing them back in the face of the original poster. Something I find it hilarious that you would accuse ME of doing - despite thte FACT that I NEVER do.

In fact, almost every negative accusation you level towards me is a thousand times more accurate if directed towards YOU. I find it hilarious when you try and damn me for YOUR attributes...despite the fact that I don't share them.

But thanks for playing...

Caine

I'm with you Caine! He called me a racist too. Just because we don't like TJ. He never asked me about any other black QB, like Warrem Moon. I thought he was a great Viking QB. Never asked me what I thought of McNabb but I don't like one QB who I don't think played well he paints a wide brush over my opinions. Now I hate every black person on this planet, which is what he is saying by calling me that. I am sure he didn't like the way Brad Johnson played he must be a racist, he hates white people.

No, I meant that for Caine, not you.

My opinion of Caine has developed through various conversations, not just his opinion of Jackson.

Your opinion of me developed when we disagreed over whether or not a police officer should taser an 80 year old woman.

See, during that debate, I presented police operating procedure, level of force explanation, public and personal safety guidelines, and the rest of the relevant data needed to judge the situation from the Police officers POV - all based upon my degree in Criminal Justice...C Mac couldn't get past the idea that it was an Old lady.

That's where his derisive tone and name calling began...and it has continued unabated since. I RECENTLY (about 1-2 weeks ago) finally tired of his disingenuous ways and called him a douche - a title he has more than earned - and he now tries to spin that as ME being the aggressor and him the victim, despite the fact that no one who has been on these boards for more than 3 months would ever agree with him.

Now he back-pedals...something he accused ME of...when others call him out. How absolutely revealing that is.

Caine

I've also read certain political comments you've made. It's a profile I have of you based on things you've said, that's all. Doesn't men it's true...

Caine
05-19-2010, 11:48 AM
C Mac D wrote:

Caine wrote:

C Mac D wrote:

tarkenton10 wrote:

Caine wrote:

C Mac D wrote:


And can we stop acting like Caine is spewing facts? He simply rights off facts then tries to pass his slanted opinion off as if it's the truth.

First, I think it's pretty clear that the above post was my opinion. And while there are a plethora of facts to support my opinion, I didn't cite any. I do find it rather ironic that you chose to dig waaaay back into the thread just to come after me...it's almost like I have a stalker...


Just because some like-minded people share his opinion means nothing.

Yup...just because the vast majority of the football watching planet agree with me is absolutely NO reason to think I might be remotely right. C Mac, on the other hand, has the agreement of the other handful of Jackson apologists to support his point of view...a much better bandwagon to jump on...


He simply cannot look at the overall picture of the entire team and focuses merely on the faults of the QB, while also writing off any stats that go against his argument... then using stats that help his argument. His entire arguments are pretty transparent. The closest he gets to facts are, "Jackson sucked in the Colts game... Jackson sucked in the playoffs..." Yeah, tough to argue facts that (despite that I've posted videos of passes hitting receivers in the numbers, only to have the receivers drop them... Caine had no response to those videos, oddly).

It seems to me that in this particular instance the question pertains specifically TO the Quarterback - which would be why I focused on that position... Funny how I do that...stay "On Topic"...you should try it sometime.

As for writing off stats:

1: I have refuted "Stats in a vacuum" and have filled in the rest of the picture when you have tried to convince us of Jackson's greatness - like his 110 QB rating last season (He must have just missed the Pro Bowl with numbers like that...).

2: As for Jackson's "drops", you try and sell it like every incompletion he's charged with was a drop. The truth is, there was one drop in the FIRST QUARTER of the Colts game that should have been TD - but he failed to move the team appreciably for the rest of the game too (Funny how you conveniently forget that tidbit). Point is, drops played a very small role in Jackon's overall play...despite the fact taht you try and make it a linchpin argument (And fail)



Now, Caine will use this post to say I think Jackson should start over Favre... or Caine will call me a douche... both are the usual Caine response. While I am a douche, I don't think Jackson should start over Favre. Never said that.

1: I haven't yet seen you post that Jackson should start over Favre, so why would I say that? Ohhhhhh...I know why you're saying that. You're accusing ME of twisting words out of context and assaulting the original poster with preposterous accusations then claiming superiority based upon incidents which never occurred...

So sorry to disappoint, but the only Poster on PPO who actually does that with consistency and regularity would be....you, C Mac. It's sort of your trademark. Sort of like you JUST DID.

2: And you were called a douche after implying I was racist. The funny part is, I haven't ever written anything that could even remotely considered racist, yet the evidence of you being a douche is overwhelming.

I guess you simply don't like people responding with fact based assertions after you post made up drivel...


The above is all truth. Might be hard to digest, Caine... but you simply don't look at the whole picture and don't really have any valid arguments except for personal opinion.

No, the above is all your personal, and very twisted, opinion. It isn't hard to digest, because - like all crap - it simply gets tossed out. You see, there are 5 people in the world whose opinions I give a shit about...and you aren't on that list.

When it comes to "whole picture", I think my track record on that is far superior to yours...you are quite well known for taking single elements out of context, twisting them to mean something unrelated to the original post, then throwing them back in the face of the original poster. Something I find it hilarious that you would accuse ME of doing - despite thte FACT that I NEVER do.

In fact, almost every negative accusation you level towards me is a thousand times more accurate if directed towards YOU. I find it hilarious when you try and damn me for YOUR attributes...despite the fact that I don't share them.

But thanks for playing...

Caine

I'm with you Caine! He called me a racist too. Just because we don't like TJ. He never asked me about any other black QB, like Warrem Moon. I thought he was a great Viking QB. Never asked me what I thought of McNabb but I don't like one QB who I don't think played well he paints a wide brush over my opinions. Now I hate every black person on this planet, which is what he is saying by calling me that. I am sure he didn't like the way Brad Johnson played he must be a racist, he hates white people.

No, I meant that for Caine, not you.

My opinion of Caine has developed through various conversations, not just his opinion of Jackson.

Your opinion of me developed when we disagreed over whether or not a police officer should taser an 80 year old woman.

See, during that debate, I presented police operating procedure, level of force explanation, public and personal safety guidelines, and the rest of the relevant data needed to judge the situation from the Police officers POV - all based upon my degree in Criminal Justice...C Mac couldn't get past the idea that it was an Old lady.

That's where his derisive tone and name calling began...and it has continued unabated since. I RECENTLY (about 1-2 weeks ago) finally tired of his disingenuous ways and called him a douche - a title he has more than earned - and he now tries to spin that as ME being the aggressor and him the victim, despite the fact that no one who has been on these boards for more than 3 months would ever agree with him.

Now he back-pedals...something he accused ME of...when others call him out. How absolutely revealing that is.

Caine

I've also read certain political comments you've made. It's a profile I have of you based on things you've said, that's all. Doesn't men it's true...

Based upon your notoriously selective application of facts and propensity for taking things out of context, I would wager HEAVILY that it is NOT true.

But, please, which "political" comments have I made? We typically avoid political issues on this site...

Caine

i_bleed_purple
05-19-2010, 11:50 AM
Caine wrote:

C Mac D wrote:

Caine wrote:

C Mac D wrote:

tarkenton10 wrote:

Caine wrote:

C Mac D wrote:


And can we stop acting like Caine is spewing facts? He simply rights off facts then tries to pass his slanted opinion off as if it's the truth.

First, I think it's pretty clear that the above post was my opinion. And while there are a plethora of facts to support my opinion, I didn't cite any. I do find it rather ironic that you chose to dig waaaay back into the thread just to come after me...it's almost like I have a stalker...


Just because some like-minded people share his opinion means nothing.

Yup...just because the vast majority of the football watching planet agree with me is absolutely NO reason to think I might be remotely right. C Mac, on the other hand, has the agreement of the other handful of Jackson apologists to support his point of view...a much better bandwagon to jump on...


He simply cannot look at the overall picture of the entire team and focuses merely on the faults of the QB, while also writing off any stats that go against his argument... then using stats that help his argument. His entire arguments are pretty transparent. The closest he gets to facts are, "Jackson sucked in the Colts game... Jackson sucked in the playoffs..." Yeah, tough to argue facts that (despite that I've posted videos of passes hitting receivers in the numbers, only to have the receivers drop them... Caine had no response to those videos, oddly).

It seems to me that in this particular instance the question pertains specifically TO the Quarterback - which would be why I focused on that position... Funny how I do that...stay "On Topic"...you should try it sometime.

As for writing off stats:

1: I have refuted "Stats in a vacuum" and have filled in the rest of the picture when you have tried to convince us of Jackson's greatness - like his 110 QB rating last season (He must have just missed the Pro Bowl with numbers like that...).

2: As for Jackson's "drops", you try and sell it like every incompletion he's charged with was a drop. The truth is, there was one drop in the FIRST QUARTER of the Colts game that should have been TD - but he failed to move the team appreciably for the rest of the game too (Funny how you conveniently forget that tidbit). Point is, drops played a very small role in Jackon's overall play...despite the fact taht you try and make it a linchpin argument (And fail)



Now, Caine will use this post to say I think Jackson should start over Favre... or Caine will call me a douche... both are the usual Caine response. While I am a douche, I don't think Jackson should start over Favre. Never said that.

1: I haven't yet seen you post that Jackson should start over Favre, so why would I say that? Ohhhhhh...I know why you're saying that. You're accusing ME of twisting words out of context and assaulting the original poster with preposterous accusations then claiming superiority based upon incidents which never occurred...

So sorry to disappoint, but the only Poster on PPO who actually does that with consistency and regularity would be....you, C Mac. It's sort of your trademark. Sort of like you JUST DID.

2: And you were called a douche after implying I was racist. The funny part is, I haven't ever written anything that could even remotely considered racist, yet the evidence of you being a douche is overwhelming.

I guess you simply don't like people responding with fact based assertions after you post made up drivel...


The above is all truth. Might be hard to digest, Caine... but you simply don't look at the whole picture and don't really have any valid arguments except for personal opinion.

No, the above is all your personal, and very twisted, opinion. It isn't hard to digest, because - like all crap - it simply gets tossed out. You see, there are 5 people in the world whose opinions I give a shit about...and you aren't on that list.

When it comes to "whole picture", I think my track record on that is far superior to yours...you are quite well known for taking single elements out of context, twisting them to mean something unrelated to the original post, then throwing them back in the face of the original poster. Something I find it hilarious that you would accuse ME of doing - despite thte FACT that I NEVER do.

In fact, almost every negative accusation you level towards me is a thousand times more accurate if directed towards YOU. I find it hilarious when you try and damn me for YOUR attributes...despite the fact that I don't share them.

But thanks for playing...

Caine

I'm with you Caine! He called me a racist too. Just because we don't like TJ. He never asked me about any other black QB, like Warrem Moon. I thought he was a great Viking QB. Never asked me what I thought of McNabb but I don't like one QB who I don't think played well he paints a wide brush over my opinions. Now I hate every black person on this planet, which is what he is saying by calling me that. I am sure he didn't like the way Brad Johnson played he must be a racist, he hates white people.

No, I meant that for Caine, not you.

My opinion of Caine has developed through various conversations, not just his opinion of Jackson.

Your opinion of me developed when we disagreed over whether or not a police officer should taser an 80 year old woman.

See, during that debate, I presented police operating procedure, level of force explanation, public and personal safety guidelines, and the rest of the relevant data needed to judge the situation from the Police officers POV - all based upon my degree in Criminal Justice...C Mac couldn't get past the idea that it was an Old lady.

That's where his derisive tone and name calling began...and it has continued unabated since. I RECENTLY (about 1-2 weeks ago) finally tired of his disingenuous ways and called him a douche - a title he has more than earned - and he now tries to spin that as ME being the aggressor and him the victim, despite the fact that no one who has been on these boards for more than 3 months would ever agree with him.

Now he back-pedals...something he accused ME of...when others call him out. How absolutely revealing that is.

Caine

I've also read certain political comments you've made. It's a profile I have of you based on things you've said, that's all. Doesn't men it's true...

Based upon your notoriously selective application of facts and propensity for taking things out of context, I would wager HEAVILY that it is NOT true.

But, please, which "political" comments have I made? We typically avoid political issues on this site...

Caine

must be all the politically incorrect racial slurs you make towards jackson, which would warrant the 'rasict' label CMac gave you

Caine
05-19-2010, 11:53 AM
i_bleed_purple wrote:

Caine wrote:

C Mac D wrote:

Caine wrote:

C Mac D wrote:

tarkenton10 wrote:

Caine wrote:

C Mac D wrote:


And can we stop acting like Caine is spewing facts? He simply rights off facts then tries to pass his slanted opinion off as if it's the truth.

First, I think it's pretty clear that the above post was my opinion. And while there are a plethora of facts to support my opinion, I didn't cite any. I do find it rather ironic that you chose to dig waaaay back into the thread just to come after me...it's almost like I have a stalker...


Just because some like-minded people share his opinion means nothing.

Yup...just because the vast majority of the football watching planet agree with me is absolutely NO reason to think I might be remotely right. C Mac, on the other hand, has the agreement of the other handful of Jackson apologists to support his point of view...a much better bandwagon to jump on...


He simply cannot look at the overall picture of the entire team and focuses merely on the faults of the QB, while also writing off any stats that go against his argument... then using stats that help his argument. His entire arguments are pretty transparent. The closest he gets to facts are, "Jackson sucked in the Colts game... Jackson sucked in the playoffs..." Yeah, tough to argue facts that (despite that I've posted videos of passes hitting receivers in the numbers, only to have the receivers drop them... Caine had no response to those videos, oddly).

It seems to me that in this particular instance the question pertains specifically TO the Quarterback - which would be why I focused on that position... Funny how I do that...stay "On Topic"...you should try it sometime.

As for writing off stats:

1: I have refuted "Stats in a vacuum" and have filled in the rest of the picture when you have tried to convince us of Jackson's greatness - like his 110 QB rating last season (He must have just missed the Pro Bowl with numbers like that...).

2: As for Jackson's "drops", you try and sell it like every incompletion he's charged with was a drop. The truth is, there was one drop in the FIRST QUARTER of the Colts game that should have been TD - but he failed to move the team appreciably for the rest of the game too (Funny how you conveniently forget that tidbit). Point is, drops played a very small role in Jackon's overall play...despite the fact taht you try and make it a linchpin argument (And fail)



Now, Caine will use this post to say I think Jackson should start over Favre... or Caine will call me a douche... both are the usual Caine response. While I am a douche, I don't think Jackson should start over Favre. Never said that.

1: I haven't yet seen you post that Jackson should start over Favre, so why would I say that? Ohhhhhh...I know why you're saying that. You're accusing ME of twisting words out of context and assaulting the original poster with preposterous accusations then claiming superiority based upon incidents which never occurred...

So sorry to disappoint, but the only Poster on PPO who actually does that with consistency and regularity would be....you, C Mac. It's sort of your trademark. Sort of like you JUST DID.

2: And you were called a douche after implying I was racist. The funny part is, I haven't ever written anything that could even remotely considered racist, yet the evidence of you being a douche is overwhelming.

I guess you simply don't like people responding with fact based assertions after you post made up drivel...


The above is all truth. Might be hard to digest, Caine... but you simply don't look at the whole picture and don't really have any valid arguments except for personal opinion.

No, the above is all your personal, and very twisted, opinion. It isn't hard to digest, because - like all crap - it simply gets tossed out. You see, there are 5 people in the world whose opinions I give a shit about...and you aren't on that list.

When it comes to "whole picture", I think my track record on that is far superior to yours...you are quite well known for taking single elements out of context, twisting them to mean something unrelated to the original post, then throwing them back in the face of the original poster. Something I find it hilarious that you would accuse ME of doing - despite thte FACT that I NEVER do.

In fact, almost every negative accusation you level towards me is a thousand times more accurate if directed towards YOU. I find it hilarious when you try and damn me for YOUR attributes...despite the fact that I don't share them.

But thanks for playing...

Caine

I'm with you Caine! He called me a racist too. Just because we don't like TJ. He never asked me about any other black QB, like Warrem Moon. I thought he was a great Viking QB. Never asked me what I thought of McNabb but I don't like one QB who I don't think played well he paints a wide brush over my opinions. Now I hate every black person on this planet, which is what he is saying by calling me that. I am sure he didn't like the way Brad Johnson played he must be a racist, he hates white people.

No, I meant that for Caine, not you.

My opinion of Caine has developed through various conversations, not just his opinion of Jackson.

Your opinion of me developed when we disagreed over whether or not a police officer should taser an 80 year old woman.

See, during that debate, I presented police operating procedure, level of force explanation, public and personal safety guidelines, and the rest of the relevant data needed to judge the situation from the Police officers POV - all based upon my degree in Criminal Justice...C Mac couldn't get past the idea that it was an Old lady.

That's where his derisive tone and name calling began...and it has continued unabated since. I RECENTLY (about 1-2 weeks ago) finally tired of his disingenuous ways and called him a douche - a title he has more than earned - and he now tries to spin that as ME being the aggressor and him the victim, despite the fact that no one who has been on these boards for more than 3 months would ever agree with him.

Now he back-pedals...something he accused ME of...when others call him out. How absolutely revealing that is.

Caine

I've also read certain political comments you've made. It's a profile I have of you based on things you've said, that's all. Doesn't men it's true...

Based upon your notoriously selective application of facts and propensity for taking things out of context, I would wager HEAVILY that it is NOT true.

But, please, which "political" comments have I made? We typically avoid political issues on this site...

Caine

must be all the politically incorrect racial slurs you make towards jackson, which would warrant the 'rasict' label CMac gave you

Yeah...I forgot about those....
:ohmy:

Caine

tarkenton10
05-19-2010, 11:54 AM
Caine wrote:

C Mac D wrote:

tarkenton10 wrote:

Caine wrote:

C Mac D wrote:


And can we stop acting like Caine is spewing facts? He simply rights off facts then tries to pass his slanted opinion off as if it's the truth.

First, I think it's pretty clear that the above post was my opinion. And while there are a plethora of facts to support my opinion, I didn't cite any. I do find it rather ironic that you chose to dig waaaay back into the thread just to come after me...it's almost like I have a stalker...


Just because some like-minded people share his opinion means nothing.

Yup...just because the vast majority of the football watching planet agree with me is absolutely NO reason to think I might be remotely right. C Mac, on the other hand, has the agreement of the other handful of Jackson apologists to support his point of view...a much better bandwagon to jump on...


He simply cannot look at the overall picture of the entire team and focuses merely on the faults of the QB, while also writing off any stats that go against his argument... then using stats that help his argument. His entire arguments are pretty transparent. The closest he gets to facts are, "Jackson sucked in the Colts game... Jackson sucked in the playoffs..." Yeah, tough to argue facts that (despite that I've posted videos of passes hitting receivers in the numbers, only to have the receivers drop them... Caine had no response to those videos, oddly).

It seems to me that in this particular instance the question pertains specifically TO the Quarterback - which would be why I focused on that position... Funny how I do that...stay "On Topic"...you should try it sometime.

As for writing off stats:

1: I have refuted "Stats in a vacuum" and have filled in the rest of the picture when you have tried to convince us of Jackson's greatness - like his 110 QB rating last season (He must have just missed the Pro Bowl with numbers like that...).

2: As for Jackson's "drops", you try and sell it like every incompletion he's charged with was a drop. The truth is, there was one drop in the FIRST QUARTER of the Colts game that should have been TD - but he failed to move the team appreciably for the rest of the game too (Funny how you conveniently forget that tidbit). Point is, drops played a very small role in Jackon's overall play...despite the fact taht you try and make it a linchpin argument (And fail)



Now, Caine will use this post to say I think Jackson should start over Favre... or Caine will call me a douche... both are the usual Caine response. While I am a douche, I don't think Jackson should start over Favre. Never said that.

1: I haven't yet seen you post that Jackson should start over Favre, so why would I say that? Ohhhhhh...I know why you're saying that. You're accusing ME of twisting words out of context and assaulting the original poster with preposterous accusations then claiming superiority based upon incidents which never occurred...

So sorry to disappoint, but the only Poster on PPO who actually does that with consistency and regularity would be....you, C Mac. It's sort of your trademark. Sort of like you JUST DID.

2: And you were called a douche after implying I was racist. The funny part is, I haven't ever written anything that could even remotely considered racist, yet the evidence of you being a douche is overwhelming.

I guess you simply don't like people responding with fact based assertions after you post made up drivel...


The above is all truth. Might be hard to digest, Caine... but you simply don't look at the whole picture and don't really have any valid arguments except for personal opinion.

No, the above is all your personal, and very twisted, opinion. It isn't hard to digest, because - like all crap - it simply gets tossed out. You see, there are 5 people in the world whose opinions I give a shit about...and you aren't on that list.

When it comes to "whole picture", I think my track record on that is far superior to yours...you are quite well known for taking single elements out of context, twisting them to mean something unrelated to the original post, then throwing them back in the face of the original poster. Something I find it hilarious that you would accuse ME of doing - despite thte FACT that I NEVER do.

In fact, almost every negative accusation you level towards me is a thousand times more accurate if directed towards YOU. I find it hilarious when you try and damn me for YOUR attributes...despite the fact that I don't share them.

But thanks for playing...

Caine

I'm with you Caine! He called me a racist too. Just because we don't like TJ. He never asked me about any other black QB, like Warrem Moon. I thought he was a great Viking QB. Never asked me what I thought of McNabb but I don't like one QB who I don't think played well he paints a wide brush over my opinions. Now I hate every black person on this planet, which is what he is saying by calling me that. I am sure he didn't like the way Brad Johnson played he must be a racist, he hates white people.

No, I meant that for Caine, not you.

My opinion of Caine has developed through various conversations, not just his opinion of Jackson.

Your opinion of me developed when we disagreed over whether or not a police officer should taser an 80 year old woman.

See, during that debate, I presented police operating procedure, level of force explanation, public and personal safety guidelines, and the rest of the relevant data needed to judge the situation from the Police officers POV - all based upon my degree in Criminal Justice...C Mac couldn't get past the idea that it was an Old lady.

That's where his derisive tone and name calling began...and it has continued unabated since. I RECENTLY (about 1-2 weeks ago) finally tired of his disingenuous ways and called him a douche - a title he has more than earned - and he now tries to spin that as ME being the aggressor and him the victim, despite the fact that no one who has been on these boards for more than 3 months would ever agree with him.

Now he back-pedals...something he accused ME of...when others call him out. How absolutely revealing that is.

Caine

I do not know the cicumstances involving this 80 year old woman nor do I want to; but I will say this- My brother is Police officer and I would rather he err on the side of caution then be shot. I am sure you can look up fatal shooting in the US and at some point an officer has been killed by an old lady.

I do agree with one point that officers follow protocol and it is a step by step process, they do not look at anyone's age, creed or color. You follow their directions or they go to the next step in protocol; that's it.

Last little tidbit of wisdom- I would rather be tried by twelve than carried by six!!

Caine
05-19-2010, 11:58 AM
tarkenton10 wrote:

Caine wrote:

C Mac D wrote:

tarkenton10 wrote:

Caine wrote:

C Mac D wrote:


And can we stop acting like Caine is spewing facts? He simply rights off facts then tries to pass his slanted opinion off as if it's the truth.

First, I think it's pretty clear that the above post was my opinion. And while there are a plethora of facts to support my opinion, I didn't cite any. I do find it rather ironic that you chose to dig waaaay back into the thread just to come after me...it's almost like I have a stalker...


Just because some like-minded people share his opinion means nothing.

Yup...just because the vast majority of the football watching planet agree with me is absolutely NO reason to think I might be remotely right. C Mac, on the other hand, has the agreement of the other handful of Jackson apologists to support his point of view...a much better bandwagon to jump on...


He simply cannot look at the overall picture of the entire team and focuses merely on the faults of the QB, while also writing off any stats that go against his argument... then using stats that help his argument. His entire arguments are pretty transparent. The closest he gets to facts are, "Jackson sucked in the Colts game... Jackson sucked in the playoffs..." Yeah, tough to argue facts that (despite that I've posted videos of passes hitting receivers in the numbers, only to have the receivers drop them... Caine had no response to those videos, oddly).

It seems to me that in this particular instance the question pertains specifically TO the Quarterback - which would be why I focused on that position... Funny how I do that...stay "On Topic"...you should try it sometime.

As for writing off stats:

1: I have refuted "Stats in a vacuum" and have filled in the rest of the picture when you have tried to convince us of Jackson's greatness - like his 110 QB rating last season (He must have just missed the Pro Bowl with numbers like that...).

2: As for Jackson's "drops", you try and sell it like every incompletion he's charged with was a drop. The truth is, there was one drop in the FIRST QUARTER of the Colts game that should have been TD - but he failed to move the team appreciably for the rest of the game too (Funny how you conveniently forget that tidbit). Point is, drops played a very small role in Jackon's overall play...despite the fact taht you try and make it a linchpin argument (And fail)



Now, Caine will use this post to say I think Jackson should start over Favre... or Caine will call me a douche... both are the usual Caine response. While I am a douche, I don't think Jackson should start over Favre. Never said that.

1: I haven't yet seen you post that Jackson should start over Favre, so why would I say that? Ohhhhhh...I know why you're saying that. You're accusing ME of twisting words out of context and assaulting the original poster with preposterous accusations then claiming superiority based upon incidents which never occurred...

So sorry to disappoint, but the only Poster on PPO who actually does that with consistency and regularity would be....you, C Mac. It's sort of your trademark. Sort of like you JUST DID.

2: And you were called a douche after implying I was racist. The funny part is, I haven't ever written anything that could even remotely considered racist, yet the evidence of you being a douche is overwhelming.

I guess you simply don't like people responding with fact based assertions after you post made up drivel...


The above is all truth. Might be hard to digest, Caine... but you simply don't look at the whole picture and don't really have any valid arguments except for personal opinion.

No, the above is all your personal, and very twisted, opinion. It isn't hard to digest, because - like all crap - it simply gets tossed out. You see, there are 5 people in the world whose opinions I give a shit about...and you aren't on that list.

When it comes to "whole picture", I think my track record on that is far superior to yours...you are quite well known for taking single elements out of context, twisting them to mean something unrelated to the original post, then throwing them back in the face of the original poster. Something I find it hilarious that you would accuse ME of doing - despite thte FACT that I NEVER do.

In fact, almost every negative accusation you level towards me is a thousand times more accurate if directed towards YOU. I find it hilarious when you try and damn me for YOUR attributes...despite the fact that I don't share them.

But thanks for playing...

Caine

I'm with you Caine! He called me a racist too. Just because we don't like TJ. He never asked me about any other black QB, like Warrem Moon. I thought he was a great Viking QB. Never asked me what I thought of McNabb but I don't like one QB who I don't think played well he paints a wide brush over my opinions. Now I hate every black person on this planet, which is what he is saying by calling me that. I am sure he didn't like the way Brad Johnson played he must be a racist, he hates white people.

No, I meant that for Caine, not you.

My opinion of Caine has developed through various conversations, not just his opinion of Jackson.

Your opinion of me developed when we disagreed over whether or not a police officer should taser an 80 year old woman.

See, during that debate, I presented police operating procedure, level of force explanation, public and personal safety guidelines, and the rest of the relevant data needed to judge the situation from the Police officers POV - all based upon my degree in Criminal Justice...C Mac couldn't get past the idea that it was an Old lady.

That's where his derisive tone and name calling began...and it has continued unabated since. I RECENTLY (about 1-2 weeks ago) finally tired of his disingenuous ways and called him a douche - a title he has more than earned - and he now tries to spin that as ME being the aggressor and him the victim, despite the fact that no one who has been on these boards for more than 3 months would ever agree with him.

Now he back-pedals...something he accused ME of...when others call him out. How absolutely revealing that is.

Caine

I do not know the cicumstances involving this 80 year old woman nor do I want to; but I will say this- My brother is Police officer and I would rather he err on the side of caution then be shot. I am sure you can look up fatal shooting in the US and at some point an officer has been killed by an old lady.

I do agree with one point that officers follow protocol and it is a step by step process, they do not look at anyone's age, creed or color. You follow their directions or they go to the next step in protocol; that's it.

Last little tidbit of wisdom- I would rather be tried by twelve than carried by six!!

Yes, I tried to explain that in painstaking detail...but was derided and lambasted for my efforts...

Caine

tarkenton10
05-19-2010, 12:00 PM
Caine wrote:

C Mac D wrote:

tarkenton10 wrote:

Caine wrote:

C Mac D wrote:


And can we stop acting like Caine is spewing facts? He simply rights off facts then tries to pass his slanted opinion off as if it's the truth.

First, I think it's pretty clear that the above post was my opinion. And while there are a plethora of facts to support my opinion, I didn't cite any. I do find it rather ironic that you chose to dig waaaay back into the thread just to come after me...it's almost like I have a stalker...


Just because some like-minded people share his opinion means nothing.

Yup...just because the vast majority of the football watching planet agree with me is absolutely NO reason to think I might be remotely right. C Mac, on the other hand, has the agreement of the other handful of Jackson apologists to support his point of view...a much better bandwagon to jump on...


He simply cannot look at the overall picture of the entire team and focuses merely on the faults of the QB, while also writing off any stats that go against his argument... then using stats that help his argument. His entire arguments are pretty transparent. The closest he gets to facts are, "Jackson sucked in the Colts game... Jackson sucked in the playoffs..." Yeah, tough to argue facts that (despite that I've posted videos of passes hitting receivers in the numbers, only to have the receivers drop them... Caine had no response to those videos, oddly).

It seems to me that in this particular instance the question pertains specifically TO the Quarterback - which would be why I focused on that position... Funny how I do that...stay "On Topic"...you should try it sometime.

As for writing off stats:

1: I have refuted "Stats in a vacuum" and have filled in the rest of the picture when you have tried to convince us of Jackson's greatness - like his 110 QB rating last season (He must have just missed the Pro Bowl with numbers like that...).

2: As for Jackson's "drops", you try and sell it like every incompletion he's charged with was a drop. The truth is, there was one drop in the FIRST QUARTER of the Colts game that should have been TD - but he failed to move the team appreciably for the rest of the game too (Funny how you conveniently forget that tidbit). Point is, drops played a very small role in Jackon's overall play...despite the fact taht you try and make it a linchpin argument (And fail)



Now, Caine will use this post to say I think Jackson should start over Favre... or Caine will call me a douche... both are the usual Caine response. While I am a douche, I don't think Jackson should start over Favre. Never said that.

1: I haven't yet seen you post that Jackson should start over Favre, so why would I say that? Ohhhhhh...I know why you're saying that. You're accusing ME of twisting words out of context and assaulting the original poster with preposterous accusations then claiming superiority based upon incidents which never occurred...

So sorry to disappoint, but the only Poster on PPO who actually does that with consistency and regularity would be....you, C Mac. It's sort of your trademark. Sort of like you JUST DID.

2: And you were called a douche after implying I was racist. The funny part is, I haven't ever written anything that could even remotely considered racist, yet the evidence of you being a douche is overwhelming.

I guess you simply don't like people responding with fact based assertions after you post made up drivel...


The above is all truth. Might be hard to digest, Caine... but you simply don't look at the whole picture and don't really have any valid arguments except for personal opinion.

No, the above is all your personal, and very twisted, opinion. It isn't hard to digest, because - like all crap - it simply gets tossed out. You see, there are 5 people in the world whose opinions I give a shit about...and you aren't on that list.

When it comes to "whole picture", I think my track record on that is far superior to yours...you are quite well known for taking single elements out of context, twisting them to mean something unrelated to the original post, then throwing them back in the face of the original poster. Something I find it hilarious that you would accuse ME of doing - despite thte FACT that I NEVER do.

In fact, almost every negative accusation you level towards me is a thousand times more accurate if directed towards YOU. I find it hilarious when you try and damn me for YOUR attributes...despite the fact that I don't share them.

But thanks for playing...

Caine

I'm with you Caine! He called me a racist too. Just because we don't like TJ. He never asked me about any other black QB, like Warrem Moon. I thought he was a great Viking QB. Never asked me what I thought of McNabb but I don't like one QB who I don't think played well he paints a wide brush over my opinions. Now I hate every black person on this planet, which is what he is saying by calling me that. I am sure he didn't like the way Brad Johnson played he must be a racist, he hates white people.

No, I meant that for Caine, not you.

My opinion of Caine has developed through various conversations, not just his opinion of Jackson.

Your opinion of me developed when we disagreed over whether or not a police officer should taser an 80 year old woman.

See, during that debate, I presented police operating procedure, level of force explanation, public and personal safety guidelines, and the rest of the relevant data needed to judge the situation from the Police officers POV - all based upon my degree in Criminal Justice...C Mac couldn't get past the idea that it was an Old lady.

That's where his derisive tone and name calling began...and it has continued unabated since. I RECENTLY (about 1-2 weeks ago) finally tired of his disingenuous ways and called him a douche - a title he has more than earned - and he now tries to spin that as ME being the aggressor and him the victim, despite the fact that no one who has been on these boards for more than 3 months would ever agree with him.

Now he back-pedals...something he accused ME of...when others call him out. How absolutely revealing that is.

Caine

Nice job!! you got to use unabated in a sentence and you weren't even talking about a defender about to hit a QB. A nonfootball unabated is about as rare as seeing a Favre sighting at this time of the year!! I would say that is a one in a milllion comment; job well done my friend (Marrdroeze)!!

C Mac D
05-19-2010, 12:03 PM
Caine wrote:

tarkenton10 wrote:

Caine wrote:

C Mac D wrote:

tarkenton10 wrote:

Caine wrote:

C Mac D wrote:


And can we stop acting like Caine is spewing facts? He simply rights off facts then tries to pass his slanted opinion off as if it's the truth.

First, I think it's pretty clear that the above post was my opinion. And while there are a plethora of facts to support my opinion, I didn't cite any. I do find it rather ironic that you chose to dig waaaay back into the thread just to come after me...it's almost like I have a stalker...


Just because some like-minded people share his opinion means nothing.

Yup...just because the vast majority of the football watching planet agree with me is absolutely NO reason to think I might be remotely right. C Mac, on the other hand, has the agreement of the other handful of Jackson apologists to support his point of view...a much better bandwagon to jump on...


He simply cannot look at the overall picture of the entire team and focuses merely on the faults of the QB, while also writing off any stats that go against his argument... then using stats that help his argument. His entire arguments are pretty transparent. The closest he gets to facts are, "Jackson sucked in the Colts game... Jackson sucked in the playoffs..." Yeah, tough to argue facts that (despite that I've posted videos of passes hitting receivers in the numbers, only to have the receivers drop them... Caine had no response to those videos, oddly).

It seems to me that in this particular instance the question pertains specifically TO the Quarterback - which would be why I focused on that position... Funny how I do that...stay "On Topic"...you should try it sometime.

As for writing off stats:

1: I have refuted "Stats in a vacuum" and have filled in the rest of the picture when you have tried to convince us of Jackson's greatness - like his 110 QB rating last season (He must have just missed the Pro Bowl with numbers like that...).

2: As for Jackson's "drops", you try and sell it like every incompletion he's charged with was a drop. The truth is, there was one drop in the FIRST QUARTER of the Colts game that should have been TD - but he failed to move the team appreciably for the rest of the game too (Funny how you conveniently forget that tidbit). Point is, drops played a very small role in Jackon's overall play...despite the fact taht you try and make it a linchpin argument (And fail)



Now, Caine will use this post to say I think Jackson should start over Favre... or Caine will call me a douche... both are the usual Caine response. While I am a douche, I don't think Jackson should start over Favre. Never said that.

1: I haven't yet seen you post that Jackson should start over Favre, so why would I say that? Ohhhhhh...I know why you're saying that. You're accusing ME of twisting words out of context and assaulting the original poster with preposterous accusations then claiming superiority based upon incidents which never occurred...

So sorry to disappoint, but the only Poster on PPO who actually does that with consistency and regularity would be....you, C Mac. It's sort of your trademark. Sort of like you JUST DID.

2: And you were called a douche after implying I was racist. The funny part is, I haven't ever written anything that could even remotely considered racist, yet the evidence of you being a douche is overwhelming.

I guess you simply don't like people responding with fact based assertions after you post made up drivel...


The above is all truth. Might be hard to digest, Caine... but you simply don't look at the whole picture and don't really have any valid arguments except for personal opinion.

No, the above is all your personal, and very twisted, opinion. It isn't hard to digest, because - like all crap - it simply gets tossed out. You see, there are 5 people in the world whose opinions I give a shit about...and you aren't on that list.

When it comes to "whole picture", I think my track record on that is far superior to yours...you are quite well known for taking single elements out of context, twisting them to mean something unrelated to the original post, then throwing them back in the face of the original poster. Something I find it hilarious that you would accuse ME of doing - despite thte FACT that I NEVER do.

In fact, almost every negative accusation you level towards me is a thousand times more accurate if directed towards YOU. I find it hilarious when you try and damn me for YOUR attributes...despite the fact that I don't share them.

But thanks for playing...

Caine

I'm with you Caine! He called me a racist too. Just because we don't like TJ. He never asked me about any other black QB, like Warrem Moon. I thought he was a great Viking QB. Never asked me what I thought of McNabb but I don't like one QB who I don't think played well he paints a wide brush over my opinions. Now I hate every black person on this planet, which is what he is saying by calling me that. I am sure he didn't like the way Brad Johnson played he must be a racist, he hates white people.

No, I meant that for Caine, not you.

My opinion of Caine has developed through various conversations, not just his opinion of Jackson.

Your opinion of me developed when we disagreed over whether or not a police officer should taser an 80 year old woman.

See, during that debate, I presented police operating procedure, level of force explanation, public and personal safety guidelines, and the rest of the relevant data needed to judge the situation from the Police officers POV - all based upon my degree in Criminal Justice...C Mac couldn't get past the idea that it was an Old lady.

That's where his derisive tone and name calling began...and it has continued unabated since. I RECENTLY (about 1-2 weeks ago) finally tired of his disingenuous ways and called him a douche - a title he has more than earned - and he now tries to spin that as ME being the aggressor and him the victim, despite the fact that no one who has been on these boards for more than 3 months would ever agree with him.

Now he back-pedals...something he accused ME of...when others call him out. How absolutely revealing that is.

Caine

I do not know the cicumstances involving this 80 year old woman nor do I want to; but I will say this- My brother is Police officer and I would rather he err on the side of caution then be shot. I am sure you can look up fatal shooting in the US and at some point an officer has been killed by an old lady.

I do agree with one point that officers follow protocol and it is a step by step process, they do not look at anyone's age, creed or color. You follow their directions or they go to the next step in protocol; that's it.

Last little tidbit of wisdom- I would rather be tried by twelve than carried by six!!

Yes, I tried to explain that in painstaking detail...but was derided and lambasted for my efforts...

Caine

lol... don't pay attention to the news much? Arizona ring a bell?

It's not even so much that one case, it's how Caine belittles Jackson saying that he's unable to learn the offense and he'll never develop into a full-time starter... despite the numbers disagreeing with him. Couple that with his rants on Edwards, calling him pretty much a mediocre DE and then calling people who stand up for Edwards, "VikingTW".

Couple that with political comments you've made and your views on police brutality... I've formed an opinion. That is all.

Marrdro
05-19-2010, 12:04 PM
i_bleed_purple wrote:

Marrdro wrote:


Suffice it to say, I would be the Vikes have made more QB moves that most NFL teams over this regimes brief tenure.



we've signed two starters and 3 backups (Bootydoesn't count)

We've never gone after a legitimate starting calibre QB othe rthan Favre. So yes, we've gone after a few, but at the end of the day, it got us about what the FO expected it to: Nothing.
Again, back to the QB thread.

What legitimate starting calibre QB has been available over that span?

Pickings have been pretty slim, to almost nothing. Pretty hard to expect anything from this staff other than what they've done based on that reality.

Marrdro
05-19-2010, 12:08 PM
Were is that sad Emticon when you need it......

Alas, I fear a good thread with alot of good input (from both sides) is going to get locked.

http://images.zaazu.com/img/male13-male-sad-lonely-smiley-emoticon-000052-large.gif

tarkenton10
05-19-2010, 12:12 PM
C Mac D wrote:

Caine wrote:

tarkenton10 wrote:

Caine wrote:

C Mac D wrote:

tarkenton10 wrote:

Caine wrote:

C Mac D wrote:


And can we stop acting like Caine is spewing facts? He simply rights off facts then tries to pass his slanted opinion off as if it's the truth.

First, I think it's pretty clear that the above post was my opinion. And while there are a plethora of facts to support my opinion, I didn't cite any. I do find it rather ironic that you chose to dig waaaay back into the thread just to come after me...it's almost like I have a stalker...


Just because some like-minded people share his opinion means nothing.

Yup...just because the vast majority of the football watching planet agree with me is absolutely NO reason to think I might be remotely right. C Mac, on the other hand, has the agreement of the other handful of Jackson apologists to support his point of view...a much better bandwagon to jump on...


He simply cannot look at the overall picture of the entire team and focuses merely on the faults of the QB, while also writing off any stats that go against his argument... then using stats that help his argument. His entire arguments are pretty transparent. The closest he gets to facts are, "Jackson sucked in the Colts game... Jackson sucked in the playoffs..." Yeah, tough to argue facts that (despite that I've posted videos of passes hitting receivers in the numbers, only to have the receivers drop them... Caine had no response to those videos, oddly).

It seems to me that in this particular instance the question pertains specifically TO the Quarterback - which would be why I focused on that position... Funny how I do that...stay "On Topic"...you should try it sometime.

As for writing off stats:

1: I have refuted "Stats in a vacuum" and have filled in the rest of the picture when you have tried to convince us of Jackson's greatness - like his 110 QB rating last season (He must have just missed the Pro Bowl with numbers like that...).

2: As for Jackson's "drops", you try and sell it like every incompletion he's charged with was a drop. The truth is, there was one drop in the FIRST QUARTER of the Colts game that should have been TD - but he failed to move the team appreciably for the rest of the game too (Funny how you conveniently forget that tidbit). Point is, drops played a very small role in Jackon's overall play...despite the fact taht you try and make it a linchpin argument (And fail)



Now, Caine will use this post to say I think Jackson should start over Favre... or Caine will call me a douche... both are the usual Caine response. While I am a douche, I don't think Jackson should start over Favre. Never said that.

1: I haven't yet seen you post that Jackson should start over Favre, so why would I say that? Ohhhhhh...I know why you're saying that. You're accusing ME of twisting words out of context and assaulting the original poster with preposterous accusations then claiming superiority based upon incidents which never occurred...

So sorry to disappoint, but the only Poster on PPO who actually does that with consistency and regularity would be....you, C Mac. It's sort of your trademark. Sort of like you JUST DID.

2: And you were called a douche after implying I was racist. The funny part is, I haven't ever written anything that could even remotely considered racist, yet the evidence of you being a douche is overwhelming.

I guess you simply don't like people responding with fact based assertions after you post made up drivel...


The above is all truth. Might be hard to digest, Caine... but you simply don't look at the whole picture and don't really have any valid arguments except for personal opinion.

No, the above is all your personal, and very twisted, opinion. It isn't hard to digest, because - like all crap - it simply gets tossed out. You see, there are 5 people in the world whose opinions I give a shit about...and you aren't on that list.

When it comes to "whole picture", I think my track record on that is far superior to yours...you are quite well known for taking single elements out of context, twisting them to mean something unrelated to the original post, then throwing them back in the face of the original poster. Something I find it hilarious that you would accuse ME of doing - despite thte FACT that I NEVER do.

In fact, almost every negative accusation you level towards me is a thousand times more accurate if directed towards YOU. I find it hilarious when you try and damn me for YOUR attributes...despite the fact that I don't share them.

But thanks for playing...

Caine

I'm with you Caine! He called me a racist too. Just because we don't like TJ. He never asked me about any other black QB, like Warrem Moon. I thought he was a great Viking QB. Never asked me what I thought of McNabb but I don't like one QB who I don't think played well he paints a wide brush over my opinions. Now I hate every black person on this planet, which is what he is saying by calling me that. I am sure he didn't like the way Brad Johnson played he must be a racist, he hates white people.

No, I meant that for Caine, not you.

My opinion of Caine has developed through various conversations, not just his opinion of Jackson.

Your opinion of me developed when we disagreed over whether or not a police officer should taser an 80 year old woman.

See, during that debate, I presented police operating procedure, level of force explanation, public and personal safety guidelines, and the rest of the relevant data needed to judge the situation from the Police officers POV - all based upon my degree in Criminal Justice...C Mac couldn't get past the idea that it was an Old lady.

That's where his derisive tone and name calling began...and it has continued unabated since. I RECENTLY (about 1-2 weeks ago) finally tired of his disingenuous ways and called him a douche - a title he has more than earned - and he now tries to spin that as ME being the aggressor and him the victim, despite the fact that no one who has been on these boards for more than 3 months would ever agree with him.

Now he back-pedals...something he accused ME of...when others call him out. How absolutely revealing that is.

Caine

I do not know the cicumstances involving this 80 year old woman nor do I want to; but I will say this- My brother is Police officer and I would rather he err on the side of caution then be shot. I am sure you can look up fatal shooting in the US and at some point an officer has been killed by an old lady.

I do agree with one point that officers follow protocol and it is a step by step process, they do not look at anyone's age, creed or color. You follow their directions or they go to the next step in protocol; that's it.

Last little tidbit of wisdom- I would rather be tried by twelve than carried by six!!

Yes, I tried to explain that in painstaking detail...but was derided and lambasted for my efforts...

Caine

lol... don't pay attention to the news much? Arizona ring a bell?

It's not even so much that one case, it's how Caine belittles Jackson saying that he's unable to learn the offense and he'll never develop into a full-time starter... despite the numbers disagreeing with him. Couple that with his rants on Edwards, calling him pretty much a mediocre DE and then calling people who stand up for Edwards, "VikingTW".

Couple that with political comments you've made and your views on police brutality... I've formed an opinion. That is all.

I don't know what political statements he made but to say something like a racist because he does not think TJ should start or Edwards is mediocre is not a very valid argument. He must have said some real incendiary remarks to raise it to the level of racism.

There are points to be made to that effect, just as you have points to your effect. TJ does not have nearly enough info for you to tell us he will be a great starter so how can you deride him for taking his stance. There just isn't enough info.

As far as the Arizona thing just because he may be on the other side of the issue does not make him a racist. That debate is not for this site and would take many, many hours to debate. So my suggestion to you is to drop the "Racist" thing and stick to the facts. I know where Caine is coming from because you have belittled me when I disagreed with your OPINION! So stay away from the you are not that smart comments and racist comments and I think you will do better in the long run.

Caine
05-19-2010, 12:24 PM
C Mac D wrote:

Caine wrote:

tarkenton10 wrote:

Caine wrote:

C Mac D wrote:

tarkenton10 wrote:

Caine wrote:

C Mac D wrote:


And can we stop acting like Caine is spewing facts? He simply rights off facts then tries to pass his slanted opinion off as if it's the truth.

First, I think it's pretty clear that the above post was my opinion. And while there are a plethora of facts to support my opinion, I didn't cite any. I do find it rather ironic that you chose to dig waaaay back into the thread just to come after me...it's almost like I have a stalker...


Just because some like-minded people share his opinion means nothing.

Yup...just because the vast majority of the football watching planet agree with me is absolutely NO reason to think I might be remotely right. C Mac, on the other hand, has the agreement of the other handful of Jackson apologists to support his point of view...a much better bandwagon to jump on...


He simply cannot look at the overall picture of the entire team and focuses merely on the faults of the QB, while also writing off any stats that go against his argument... then using stats that help his argument. His entire arguments are pretty transparent. The closest he gets to facts are, "Jackson sucked in the Colts game... Jackson sucked in the playoffs..." Yeah, tough to argue facts that (despite that I've posted videos of passes hitting receivers in the numbers, only to have the receivers drop them... Caine had no response to those videos, oddly).

It seems to me that in this particular instance the question pertains specifically TO the Quarterback - which would be why I focused on that position... Funny how I do that...stay "On Topic"...you should try it sometime.

As for writing off stats:

1: I have refuted "Stats in a vacuum" and have filled in the rest of the picture when you have tried to convince us of Jackson's greatness - like his 110 QB rating last season (He must have just missed the Pro Bowl with numbers like that...).

2: As for Jackson's "drops", you try and sell it like every incompletion he's charged with was a drop. The truth is, there was one drop in the FIRST QUARTER of the Colts game that should have been TD - but he failed to move the team appreciably for the rest of the game too (Funny how you conveniently forget that tidbit). Point is, drops played a very small role in Jackon's overall play...despite the fact taht you try and make it a linchpin argument (And fail)



Now, Caine will use this post to say I think Jackson should start over Favre... or Caine will call me a douche... both are the usual Caine response. While I am a douche, I don't think Jackson should start over Favre. Never said that.

1: I haven't yet seen you post that Jackson should start over Favre, so why would I say that? Ohhhhhh...I know why you're saying that. You're accusing ME of twisting words out of context and assaulting the original poster with preposterous accusations then claiming superiority based upon incidents which never occurred...

So sorry to disappoint, but the only Poster on PPO who actually does that with consistency and regularity would be....you, C Mac. It's sort of your trademark. Sort of like you JUST DID.

2: And you were called a douche after implying I was racist. The funny part is, I haven't ever written anything that could even remotely considered racist, yet the evidence of you being a douche is overwhelming.

I guess you simply don't like people responding with fact based assertions after you post made up drivel...


The above is all truth. Might be hard to digest, Caine... but you simply don't look at the whole picture and don't really have any valid arguments except for personal opinion.

No, the above is all your personal, and very twisted, opinion. It isn't hard to digest, because - like all crap - it simply gets tossed out. You see, there are 5 people in the world whose opinions I give a shit about...and you aren't on that list.

When it comes to "whole picture", I think my track record on that is far superior to yours...you are quite well known for taking single elements out of context, twisting them to mean something unrelated to the original post, then throwing them back in the face of the original poster. Something I find it hilarious that you would accuse ME of doing - despite thte FACT that I NEVER do.

In fact, almost every negative accusation you level towards me is a thousand times more accurate if directed towards YOU. I find it hilarious when you try and damn me for YOUR attributes...despite the fact that I don't share them.

But thanks for playing...

Caine

I'm with you Caine! He called me a racist too. Just because we don't like TJ. He never asked me about any other black QB, like Warrem Moon. I thought he was a great Viking QB. Never asked me what I thought of McNabb but I don't like one QB who I don't think played well he paints a wide brush over my opinions. Now I hate every black person on this planet, which is what he is saying by calling me that. I am sure he didn't like the way Brad Johnson played he must be a racist, he hates white people.

No, I meant that for Caine, not you.

My opinion of Caine has developed through various conversations, not just his opinion of Jackson.

Your opinion of me developed when we disagreed over whether or not a police officer should taser an 80 year old woman.

See, during that debate, I presented police operating procedure, level of force explanation, public and personal safety guidelines, and the rest of the relevant data needed to judge the situation from the Police officers POV - all based upon my degree in Criminal Justice...C Mac couldn't get past the idea that it was an Old lady.

That's where his derisive tone and name calling began...and it has continued unabated since. I RECENTLY (about 1-2 weeks ago) finally tired of his disingenuous ways and called him a douche - a title he has more than earned - and he now tries to spin that as ME being the aggressor and him the victim, despite the fact that no one who has been on these boards for more than 3 months would ever agree with him.

Now he back-pedals...something he accused ME of...when others call him out. How absolutely revealing that is.

Caine

I do not know the cicumstances involving this 80 year old woman nor do I want to; but I will say this- My brother is Police officer and I would rather he err on the side of caution then be shot. I am sure you can look up fatal shooting in the US and at some point an officer has been killed by an old lady.

I do agree with one point that officers follow protocol and it is a step by step process, they do not look at anyone's age, creed or color. You follow their directions or they go to the next step in protocol; that's it.

Last little tidbit of wisdom- I would rather be tried by twelve than carried by six!!

Yes, I tried to explain that in painstaking detail...but was derided and lambasted for my efforts...

Caine

lol... don't pay attention to the news much? Arizona ring a bell?

It's not even so much that one case, it's how Caine belittles Jackson saying that he's unable to learn the offense and he'll never develop into a full-time starter... despite the numbers disagreeing with him. Couple that with his rants on Edwards, calling him pretty much a mediocre DE and then calling people who stand up for Edwards, "VikingTW".

Couple that with political comments you've made and your views on police brutality... I've formed an opinion. That is all.

1: Where have I made ANY comments on Arizona? PLease? Find me ONE quote!! Just ONE!!!

Opppps - I HAVEN'T!!!

2: Reread my critiques of Jackson - I have NEVER said "Unable to learn the offense". Again, there's that word "NEVER".

3: I HAVE said I strongly doubt he'll develop into a QUALITY full time starter.

and I have yet to see any numbers which refute my position - especially when they are put back into context. But keep trying....

4: I never said Edwards was a mediocre DE, I said he was good if not very good, but not yet GREAT. That's quite a long way away from mediocre...but thanks for another sterling misquote...

5: I refered to that poster as TW because of the manner in which he defended his indefensible position - ironically, I also asked the Mods to see if it really was TW (It wasn't). So, you get 1/2 credit for this one.

6: Again, I avoid political statements here - this is a football site. Feel free to link any political comments you can.

7: Police Brutality - I think I'm on record as being very much AGAINST police brutality. IN fact, I've condemned any number of unwarranted acts by Police officers. With the old lady, however, there were a great many reasons to SUPPORT the officers actions. It, therefore, no longer became a clear cut issue of brutality. And, based upon my training and experience in a very related field, I interpreted it thus.

You disagreed, based solely upon the idea that it was an old lady.

SO, based upon those 7 points - which you covered in your above post - you have been wrong or misquoted me 5 1/2 times. That means that the opinion you have formed is based upon 78.6% incorrect information...

hmmmmmmmm....

Caine

Caine
05-19-2010, 12:28 PM
Marrdro wrote:

Were is that sad Emticon when you need it......

Alas, I fear a good thread with alot of good input (from both sides) is going to get locked.

http://images.zaazu.com/img/male13-male-sad-lonely-smiley-emoticon-000052-large.gif

I agree, Marrdro. It likely will, and I too feel badly about that.

But I'm tired of taking it. C Mac continuously misquotes me, misinterprets me, and mischaracterizes me in order to validate himself, and I'm tired of his BS.

Caine

C Mac D
05-19-2010, 12:29 PM
Caine wrote:

Marrdro wrote:

Were is that sad Emticon when you need it......

Alas, I fear a good thread with alot of good input (from both sides) is going to get locked.

http://images.zaazu.com/img/male13-male-sad-lonely-smiley-emoticon-000052-large.gif

I agree, Marrdro. It likely will, and I too feel badly about that.

But I'm tired of taking it. C Mac continuously misquotes me, misinterprets me, and mischaracterizes me in order to validate himself, and I'm tired of his BS.

Caine

Pot, meet kettle.

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_e3gDaHO8VLQ/R2FuolZzkBI/AAAAAAAADCs/7ZDMX3srYyo/s320/black_kettle.jpg

Caine
05-19-2010, 12:33 PM
C Mac D wrote:

Caine wrote:

Marrdro wrote:

Were is that sad Emticon when you need it......

Alas, I fear a good thread with alot of good input (from both sides) is going to get locked.

http://images.zaazu.com/img/male13-male-sad-lonely-smiley-emoticon-000052-large.gif

I agree, Marrdro. It likely will, and I too feel badly about that.

But I'm tired of taking it. C Mac continuously misquotes me, misinterprets me, and mischaracterizes me in order to validate himself, and I'm tired of his BS.

Caine

Pot, meet kettle.

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_e3gDaHO8VLQ/R2FuolZzkBI/AAAAAAAADCs/7ZDMX3srYyo/s320/black_kettle.jpg

Nice backpedal...trouble is, I didn't start this, you did. I didn't call YOU out and try and blast YOU by making up BS reasons for me not to like you...YOU did.

I simply pointed out all the ways you were WRONG - which you frequently are. And your response, as is typical of you, was to disparage and name call...

Caine

Marrdro
05-19-2010, 12:34 PM
Caine wrote:

Marrdro wrote:

Were is that sad Emticon when you need it......

Alas, I fear a good thread with alot of good input (from both sides) is going to get locked.

http://images.zaazu.com/img/male13-male-sad-lonely-smiley-emoticon-000052-large.gif

I agree, Marrdro. It likely will, and I too feel badly about that.

But I'm tired of taking it. C Mac continuously misquotes me, misinterprets me, and mischaracterizes me in order to validate himself, and I'm tired of his BS.

Caine
CmacD = Marrdro = Button pusher when things get boring.

Both of those cats go out of thier way at times to push buttons. If it was me I wouldn't let those two get to me. ;)

On a side note, I am talking about Bad Marrdro. Good Marrdro only tries to have fun.

jargomcfargo
05-19-2010, 12:34 PM
LMAO! A thread discussing whether TJ is a better QB than (pick any other QB), getting locked.
I say hell, it's about time!

ejmat
05-19-2010, 12:35 PM
C Mac D wrote:

Caine wrote:

Marrdro wrote:

Were is that sad Emticon when you need it......

Alas, I fear a good thread with alot of good input (from both sides) is going to get locked.

http://images.zaazu.com/img/male13-male-sad-lonely-smiley-emoticon-000052-large.gif

I agree, Marrdro. It likely will, and I too feel badly about that.

But I'm tired of taking it. C Mac continuously misquotes me, misinterprets me, and mischaracterizes me in order to validate himself, and I'm tired of his BS.

Caine

Pot, meet kettle.

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_e3gDaHO8VLQ/R2FuolZzkBI/AAAAAAAADCs/7ZDMX3srYyo/s320/black_kettle.jpg

Something in which CMac knows very well. Caine is correct in everything he is saying. You have a bad habit of misquoting or taking a portion of a quote and making it look like people are saying something wrong. You do it all the time.

A lof of people here are sick of your crap. It's been noted several times. Some like you because of your witty humor. I will say I do like your humor too. However, if anyone is good at the pot calling the kettle black it is CMac. I know exactly what Caine and Tark are saying. You have called me a racist as well because I have stated TJ has not validated himself as being a good starter in this league yet.

Marrdro
05-19-2010, 12:55 PM
C Mac D wrote:

Caine wrote:

Marrdro wrote:

Were is that sad Emticon when you need it......

Alas, I fear a good thread with alot of good input (from both sides) is going to get locked.

http://images.zaazu.com/img/male13-male-sad-lonely-smiley-emoticon-000052-large.gif

I agree, Marrdro. It likely will, and I too feel badly about that.

But I'm tired of taking it. C Mac continuously misquotes me, misinterprets me, and mischaracterizes me in order to validate himself, and I'm tired of his BS.

Caine

Pot, meet kettle.

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_e3gDaHO8VLQ/R2FuolZzkBI/AAAAAAAADCs/7ZDMX3srYyo/s320/black_kettle.jpg
Your not making it any easier for me........

Maybe we have two CmacD's. Good Cmac, Bad Cmac...... :P

Marrdro
05-19-2010, 12:58 PM
jargomcfargo wrote:

LMAO! A thread discussing whether TJ is a better QB than (pick any other QB), getting locked.
I say hell, it's about time!
.....snicker...... :cheer:

Prophet
05-19-2010, 01:22 PM
You can just feel the offseason love in this thread.

Marrdro
05-19-2010, 01:29 PM
Prophet wrote:

You can just feel the offseason love in this thread.
Everyone just needs to start using the "My Friend" verbiage.

If you use it enough, it starts catching on and will spread to a point that we are friends....

Rockmolder
05-19-2010, 01:33 PM
Marrdro wrote:

Prophet wrote:

You can just feel the offseason love in this thread.
Everyone just needs to start using the "My Friend" verbiage.

If you use it enough, it starts catching on and will spread to a point that we are friends....

I prefer "sexy little pixie", awkward as it was the first few times.

Marrdro
05-19-2010, 01:35 PM
Rockmolder wrote:

Marrdro wrote:

Prophet wrote:

You can just feel the offseason love in this thread.
Everyone just needs to start using the "My Friend" verbiage.

If you use it enough, it starts catching on and will spread to a point that we are friends....

I prefer "sexy little pixie", awkward as it was the first few times.
I still need to get even with Vesty over that.

AngloVike
05-19-2010, 02:52 PM
Marrdro wrote:

Rockmolder wrote:

Marrdro wrote:

Prophet wrote:

You can just feel the offseason love in this thread.
Everyone just needs to start using the "My Friend" verbiage.

If you use it enough, it starts catching on and will spread to a point that we are friends....

I prefer "sexy little pixie", awkward as it was the first few times.
I still need to get even with Vesty over that.

never, ever, mess with the Vest.. you'll come off worse and it will all end in tears :woohoo:

Purple Floyd
05-19-2010, 08:34 PM
C Mac D wrote:

lol... don't pay attention to the news much? Arizona ring a bell?

It's not even so much that one case, it's how Caine belittles Jackson saying that he's unable to learn the offense and he'll never develop into a full-time starter... despite the numbers disagreeing with him. Couple that with his rants on Edwards, calling him pretty much a mediocre DE and then calling people who stand up for Edwards, "VikingTW".

Couple that with political comments you've made and your views on police brutality... I've formed an opinion. That is all.[/quote]

Well I have been saying the same things so I guess I am a racist too. Of course I also think O'Sullivan and McMahon sucked so I must be hibernophobic on top of it and because I think Cook sucks I must really hate food as well.

Purple Floyd
05-19-2010, 08:35 PM
Rockmolder wrote:

Marrdro wrote:

Prophet wrote:

You can just feel the offseason love in this thread.
Everyone just needs to start using the "My Friend" verbiage.

If you use it enough, it starts catching on and will spread to a point that we are friends....

I prefer "sexy little pixie", awkward as it was the first few times.

As a packer fan that certainly can't be the worst thing you have had to get used to. :woohoo:

Rockmolder
05-19-2010, 08:42 PM
Purple Floyd wrote:

Rockmolder wrote:

Marrdro wrote:

Prophet wrote:

You can just feel the offseason love in this thread.
Everyone just needs to start using the "My Friend" verbiage.

If you use it enough, it starts catching on and will spread to a point that we are friends....

I prefer "sexy little pixie", awkward as it was the first few times.

As a packer fan that certainly can't be the worst thing you have had to get used to. :woohoo:

It helps when no one actually knows that you're a Packer fan.

It's usually goes something like this over here in the Netherlands.

"What the hell kind of shirt is that?"

"It's a Packers shirt. American Football."

"Isn't that like Rugby?"

I then usually hit them.

And run away as fast as I can, since I'm 6'1, 155 and have the arms of a little girl.

So my shirts are just hanging on my wall right now.

Thought I'd take this one a bit more off-topic than it already was.

Purple Floyd
05-19-2010, 09:26 PM
Rockmolder wrote:

Purple Floyd wrote:

Rockmolder wrote:

Marrdro wrote:

Prophet wrote:

You can just feel the offseason love in this thread.
Everyone just needs to start using the "My Friend" verbiage.

If you use it enough, it starts catching on and will spread to a point that we are friends....

I prefer "sexy little pixie", awkward as it was the first few times.

As a packer fan that certainly can't be the worst thing you have had to get used to. :woohoo:

It helps when no one actually knows that you're a Packer fan.

It's usually goes something like this over here in the Netherlands.

"What the hell kind of shirt is that?"

"It's a Packers shirt. American Football."

"Isn't that like Rugby?"

I then usually hit them.

And run away as fast as I can, since I'm 6'1, 155 and have the arms of a little girl.

So my shirts are just hanging on my wall right now.

Thought I'd take this one a bit more off-topic than it already was.LOL

Zeus
05-19-2010, 11:09 PM
Rockmolder wrote:

It helps when no one actually knows that you're a Packer fan.

It's usually goes something like this over here in the Netherlands.

Being a Dutch Packer fan - would you rather stick your finger in a dyke or a sheep?

=Z=

tarkenton10
05-20-2010, 07:51 AM
C Mac D wrote:

Caine wrote:

tarkenton10 wrote:

Caine wrote:

C Mac D wrote:

tarkenton10 wrote:

Caine wrote:

C Mac D wrote:


And can we stop acting like Caine is spewing facts? He simply rights off facts then tries to pass his slanted opinion off as if it's the truth.

First, I think it's pretty clear that the above post was my opinion. And while there are a plethora of facts to support my opinion, I didn't cite any. I do find it rather ironic that you chose to dig waaaay back into the thread just to come after me...it's almost like I have a stalker...


Just because some like-minded people share his opinion means nothing.

Yup...just because the vast majority of the football watching planet agree with me is absolutely NO reason to think I might be remotely right. C Mac, on the other hand, has the agreement of the other handful of Jackson apologists to support his point of view...a much better bandwagon to jump on...


He simply cannot look at the overall picture of the entire team and focuses merely on the faults of the QB, while also writing off any stats that go against his argument... then using stats that help his argument. His entire arguments are pretty transparent. The closest he gets to facts are, "Jackson sucked in the Colts game... Jackson sucked in the playoffs..." Yeah, tough to argue facts that (despite that I've posted videos of passes hitting receivers in the numbers, only to have the receivers drop them... Caine had no response to those videos, oddly).

It seems to me that in this particular instance the question pertains specifically TO the Quarterback - which would be why I focused on that position... Funny how I do that...stay "On Topic"...you should try it sometime.

As for writing off stats:

1: I have refuted "Stats in a vacuum" and have filled in the rest of the picture when you have tried to convince us of Jackson's greatness - like his 110 QB rating last season (He must have just missed the Pro Bowl with numbers like that...).

2: As for Jackson's "drops", you try and sell it like every incompletion he's charged with was a drop. The truth is, there was one drop in the FIRST QUARTER of the Colts game that should have been TD - but he failed to move the team appreciably for the rest of the game too (Funny how you conveniently forget that tidbit). Point is, drops played a very small role in Jackon's overall play...despite the fact taht you try and make it a linchpin argument (And fail)



Now, Caine will use this post to say I think Jackson should start over Favre... or Caine will call me a douche... both are the usual Caine response. While I am a douche, I don't think Jackson should start over Favre. Never said that.

1: I haven't yet seen you post that Jackson should start over Favre, so why would I say that? Ohhhhhh...I know why you're saying that. You're accusing ME of twisting words out of context and assaulting the original poster with preposterous accusations then claiming superiority based upon incidents which never occurred...

So sorry to disappoint, but the only Poster on PPO who actually does that with consistency and regularity would be....you, C Mac. It's sort of your trademark. Sort of like you JUST DID.

2: And you were called a douche after implying I was racist. The funny part is, I haven't ever written anything that could even remotely considered racist, yet the evidence of you being a douche is overwhelming.

I guess you simply don't like people responding with fact based assertions after you post made up drivel...


The above is all truth. Might be hard to digest, Caine... but you simply don't look at the whole picture and don't really have any valid arguments except for personal opinion.

No, the above is all your personal, and very twisted, opinion. It isn't hard to digest, because - like all crap - it simply gets tossed out. You see, there are 5 people in the world whose opinions I give a shit about...and you aren't on that list.

When it comes to "whole picture", I think my track record on that is far superior to yours...you are quite well known for taking single elements out of context, twisting them to mean something unrelated to the original post, then throwing them back in the face of the original poster. Something I find it hilarious that you would accuse ME of doing - despite thte FACT that I NEVER do.

In fact, almost every negative accusation you level towards me is a thousand times more accurate if directed towards YOU. I find it hilarious when you try and damn me for YOUR attributes...despite the fact that I don't share them.

But thanks for playing...

Caine

I'm with you Caine! He called me a racist too. Just because we don't like TJ. He never asked me about any other black QB, like Warrem Moon. I thought he was a great Viking QB. Never asked me what I thought of McNabb but I don't like one QB who I don't think played well he paints a wide brush over my opinions. Now I hate every black person on this planet, which is what he is saying by calling me that. I am sure he didn't like the way Brad Johnson played he must be a racist, he hates white people.

No, I meant that for Caine, not you.

My opinion of Caine has developed through various conversations, not just his opinion of Jackson.

Your opinion of me developed when we disagreed over whether or not a police officer should taser an 80 year old woman.

See, during that debate, I presented police operating procedure, level of force explanation, public and personal safety guidelines, and the rest of the relevant data needed to judge the situation from the Police officers POV - all based upon my degree in Criminal Justice...C Mac couldn't get past the idea that it was an Old lady.

That's where his derisive tone and name calling began...and it has continued unabated since. I RECENTLY (about 1-2 weeks ago) finally tired of his disingenuous ways and called him a douche - a title he has more than earned - and he now tries to spin that as ME being the aggressor and him the victim, despite the fact that no one who has been on these boards for more than 3 months would ever agree with him.

Now he back-pedals...something he accused ME of...when others call him out. How absolutely revealing that is.

Caine

I do not know the cicumstances involving this 80 year old woman nor do I want to; but I will say this- My brother is Police officer and I would rather he err on the side of caution then be shot. I am sure you can look up fatal shooting in the US and at some point an officer has been killed by an old lady.

I do agree with one point that officers follow protocol and it is a step by step process, they do not look at anyone's age, creed or color. You follow their directions or they go to the next step in protocol; that's it.

Last little tidbit of wisdom- I would rather be tried by twelve than carried by six!!

Yes, I tried to explain that in painstaking detail...but was derided and lambasted for my efforts...

Caine

lol... don't pay attention to the news much? Arizona ring a bell?
It's not even so much that one case, it's how Caine belittles Jackson saying that he's unable to learn the offense and he'll never develop into a full-time starter... despite the numbers disagreeing with him. Couple that with his rants on Edwards, calling him pretty much a mediocre DE and then calling people who stand up for Edwards, "VikingTW".

Couple that with political comments you've made and your views on police brutality... I've formed an opinion. That is all.

What is that sentence suppose to mean? And it is very condescending, much of the reason for people finging you arrogant and distastful! Waht does Arizona have todo with being a racist?

jargomcfargo
05-20-2010, 09:58 AM
AngloVike wrote:

Marrdro wrote:

Rockmolder wrote:

Marrdro wrote:

Prophet wrote:

You can just feel the offseason love in this thread.
Everyone just needs to start using the "My Friend" verbiage.

If you use it enough, it starts catching on and will spread to a point that we are friends....

I prefer "sexy little pixie", awkward as it was the first few times.
I still need to get even with Vesty over that.

never, ever, mess with the Vest.. you'll come off worse and it will all end in tears :woohoo:

Vesty has hired a full-time team of druids to build a series of virtual mini Stonehenge monuments to drain 'negative energy' from this thread.
Not sure if it's working. Might need to ask Neph the muncher.

Prophet
05-20-2010, 10:05 AM
jargomcfargo wrote:

AngloVike wrote:

Marrdro wrote:

Rockmolder wrote:

Marrdro wrote:

Prophet wrote:

You can just feel the offseason love in this thread.
Everyone just needs to start using the "My Friend" verbiage.

If you use it enough, it starts catching on and will spread to a point that we are friends....

I prefer "sexy little pixie", awkward as it was the first few times.
I still need to get even with Vesty over that.

never, ever, mess with the Vest.. you'll come off worse and it will all end in tears :woohoo:

Vesty has hired a full-time team of druids to build a series of virtual mini Stonehenge monuments to drain 'negative energy' from this thread.
Not sure if it's working. Might need to ask Neph the muncher.

I also heard this. My latest satellite reading shows Vesty worshipping at the alter of carhenge (http://www.carhenge.com/).

http://www.carhenge.com/images/carhengemain1.jpg

C Mac D
05-20-2010, 10:11 AM
tarkenton10 wrote:

What is that sentence suppose to mean? And it is very condescending, much of the reason for people finging you arrogant and distastful! Waht does Arizona have todo with being a racist?

It was in response to this comment:

tarkenton10 wrote:

I do agree with one point that officers follow protocol and it is a step by step process, they do not look at anyone's age, creed or color. You follow their directions or they go to the next step in protocol; that's it.

Then I said:

C Mac D wrote:

lol... don't pay attention to the news much? Arizona ring a bell?

Because the recently passed laws in Arizona prove that police are doing everything you claim they are not. That is all.

El Vikingo
05-20-2010, 10:38 AM
Talking seriously ,the only idea of Tarvarias being our starting Qb makes me run in terror and then cry when none sees me.

tarkenton10
05-20-2010, 11:15 AM
C Mac D wrote:

tarkenton10 wrote:

What is that sentence suppose to mean? And it is very condescending, much of the reason for people finging you arrogant and distastful! Waht does Arizona have todo with being a racist?

It was in response to this comment:

tarkenton10 wrote:

I do agree with one point that officers follow protocol and it is a step by step process, they do not look at anyone's age, creed or color. You follow their directions or they go to the next step in protocol; that's it.

Then I said:

C Mac D wrote:

lol... don't pay attention to the news much? Arizona ring a bell?

Because the recently passed laws in Arizona prove that police are doing everything you claim they are not. That is all.

Not main stream media they drink too much koolaid from one side of the spectrum! I have not heard about any mass examples but there are always exceptions to the rule. I ahve no doubt youwill come up with a case or two but by and large I think that most officers hired are there for a cause they believe in.

C Mac D
05-20-2010, 12:08 PM
LOL... I definitely read it. Of course you wouldn't come right out and support it, that law is the definition of racism ... yet you go on to justify the law and say you think it will work. I wonder what your opinion behind closed door.

(and yes I understand the law, ive ha many conversations with a California highway patrol officer about it... my uncle... and he said its blatant racism and goes against evrything this country is founded on. Caries, sorry if I take his opinion over yours.... LOL.)

Caine
05-20-2010, 12:18 PM
C Mac D wrote:

LOL... I definitely read it. Of course you wouldn't come right out and support it, that law is the definition of racism ... yet you go on to justify the law and say you think it will work. I wonder what your opinion behind closed door.

(and yes I understand the law, ive ha many conversations with a California highway patrol officer about it... my uncle... and he said its blatant racism and goes against evrything this country is founded on. Caries, sorry if I take his opinion over yours.... LOL.)

No, I said I do NOT think it will work. See, operative word here is "NOT".

But hey, feel free to continue to misquote me and attribute things to me that are neither written nor implied.

Caine

C Mac D
05-20-2010, 12:45 PM
Caine wrote:

C Mac D wrote:

LOL... I definitely read it. Of course you wouldn't come right out and support it, that law is the definition of racism ... yet you go on to justify the law and say you think it will work. I wonder what your opinion behind closed door.

(and yes I understand the law, ive ha many conversations with a California highway patrol officer about it... my uncle... and he said its blatant racism and goes against evrything this country is founded on. Caries, sorry if I take his opinion over yours.... LOL.)

No, I said I do NOT think it will work. See, operative word here is "NOT".

But hey, feel free to continue to misquote me and attribute things to me that are neither written nor implied.

Caine

So, you're against blatant racism, but can justify it? Odd.

tarkenton10
05-20-2010, 12:53 PM
C Mac D wrote:

Caine wrote:

C Mac D wrote:

tarkenton10 wrote:

What is that sentence suppose to mean? And it is very condescending, much of the reason for people finging you arrogant and distastful! Waht does Arizona have todo with being a racist?

It was in response to this comment:

tarkenton10 wrote:

I do agree with one point that officers follow protocol and it is a step by step process, they do not look at anyone's age, creed or color. You follow their directions or they go to the next step in protocol; that's it.

Then I said:

C Mac D wrote:

lol... don't pay attention to the news much? Arizona ring a bell?

Because the recently passed laws in Arizona prove that police are doing everything you claim they are not. That is all.

I'm sorry, when did it become the Police who pass laws?

They don't. They are charged with ENFORCING them.

Here is my first, and hopefully last, comment on the Arizona situation on PPO.

The law clearly states that if the Police have REASONABLE SUSPICION, they are to ascertain the citizenship status of the individual in question. There's that damn term, Reasonable Suspicion. Defined, that means that a REASONABLE person under the SAME CIRCUMSTANCES would suspect the SAME THING. This isn't blind witch hunting or racial profiling (As some like to charge).

Now, is this new law really going to improve the situation in Arizona? I doubt it. It is already against the law to be in this country illegally - we simply can't enforce it. Criminalizing it won't really have a positive effect because it STILL comes down to FUNDING. It costs MONEY to deport Illegals, money that tax payers DON'T want to spend. Further, businesses that hire those same illegals will be forced to pay a higher wage (and taxes, FICA, etc) to replace those workers - which drives UP their prices.

The TRUTH is, C Mac, you haven't the foggiest notion about what you're talking about - not an uncommon position for you. You are so busy trying to persecute me, or the Police, that you blindly ignore the facts around you.

I think the law in Arizona is not going to work - SURPRISE!!! You likely believed I was going to be all for it, lining up with my baton to club the next "suspicious person"...nope.

At the same time, what do you know about the problems Arizona is facing, and WHY they passed this law? Are you aware of the American civilians who have been killed or run off their land by drug cartels who are trafficking BLATANTLY across the borders? National Geographic did an excellent story about it almost 3 years ago...and it's only getting worse. Are you aware of the FACT that the local police and the Border Patrol are woefully undermanned and under funded to deal with this issue? Are you aware of the FACT that the Marines were requested to assist with Border operations but due to certain bylaws were not allowed by congress to do so?

It is my guess that you really aren't all that familiar with what is actually happening in Arizona, but you're "offended" by the law passed there regardless. Right? Did you know that according to almost every poll taken, the majority of people are FOR the new law? That's nationwide, not just in Arizona.

Ironically, as I stated above, I am not. I don't feel it will adequately address the true problem, and will instead "criminalize" the wrong people. But that's not what you expected to hear, is it.

The truth is, you jumped on a line of thought and refused to budge, despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary. In a post previously I showed how you were completely off the mark in 5 1/2 of 7 points you posted about me. Now, I've shown that you took a popular "hot button" topic at face value without any understanding of the actual issue. Maybe it's time you reassessed your positions here.

Caine

lol... spoken like a true "tea partier"

I'm guessing you think lynch mobs should be brought back too.

C Mac You absolutely amaze me! you cry how we should be tolerant and the Arizona law is discriminatory. You blast the police and make blanket stements against them BASED ON MAINSTREAM MEDIA! NO EVIDENCE!! It doesn't sound like you have done any investigation on your own but you just listen to rumors and your nughtly news. Make a condescending remark about people involved with the tea party movement all the while acting like you want everyone else to get together and sing CUMBIAH MY LORD. Although IMO you sound like the type who thinks they should take my lord out of that song.

What is wrong with the tennats of the tea party movement, Do you knwo what they aspouse?

Mr Anderson
05-20-2010, 12:57 PM
I'm just gonna throw it out there, it's not my opinion on the subject, it's US Law:

Suspicionless stops, and searches without cause(based on profiles, e.g. "Drug Courier Profiles") are only legal at the border and in airports. It's one of the few exceptions to the 4th amendment, and again only applicable at the border and in airports.


The law passed by Arizona, which is profiling by nature, is going to be overturned by a federal court. I'll be surprised if it makes it to the US Supreme Court.

I wonder how long this thread will last.

C Mac D
05-20-2010, 12:58 PM
tarkenton10 wrote:

C Mac D wrote:

Caine wrote:

C Mac D wrote:

tarkenton10 wrote:

What is that sentence suppose to mean? And it is very condescending, much of the reason for people finging you arrogant and distastful! Waht does Arizona have todo with being a racist?

It was in response to this comment:

tarkenton10 wrote:

I do agree with one point that officers follow protocol and it is a step by step process, they do not look at anyone's age, creed or color. You follow their directions or they go to the next step in protocol; that's it.

Then I said:

C Mac D wrote:

lol... don't pay attention to the news much? Arizona ring a bell?

Because the recently passed laws in Arizona prove that police are doing everything you claim they are not. That is all.

I'm sorry, when did it become the Police who pass laws?

They don't. They are charged with ENFORCING them.

Here is my first, and hopefully last, comment on the Arizona situation on PPO.

The law clearly states that if the Police have REASONABLE SUSPICION, they are to ascertain the citizenship status of the individual in question. There's that damn term, Reasonable Suspicion. Defined, that means that a REASONABLE person under the SAME CIRCUMSTANCES would suspect the SAME THING. This isn't blind witch hunting or racial profiling (As some like to charge).

Now, is this new law really going to improve the situation in Arizona? I doubt it. It is already against the law to be in this country illegally - we simply can't enforce it. Criminalizing it won't really have a positive effect because it STILL comes down to FUNDING. It costs MONEY to deport Illegals, money that tax payers DON'T want to spend. Further, businesses that hire those same illegals will be forced to pay a higher wage (and taxes, FICA, etc) to replace those workers - which drives UP their prices.

The TRUTH is, C Mac, you haven't the foggiest notion about what you're talking about - not an uncommon position for you. You are so busy trying to persecute me, or the Police, that you blindly ignore the facts around you.

I think the law in Arizona is not going to work - SURPRISE!!! You likely believed I was going to be all for it, lining up with my baton to club the next "suspicious person"...nope.

At the same time, what do you know about the problems Arizona is facing, and WHY they passed this law? Are you aware of the American civilians who have been killed or run off their land by drug cartels who are trafficking BLATANTLY across the borders? National Geographic did an excellent story about it almost 3 years ago...and it's only getting worse. Are you aware of the FACT that the local police and the Border Patrol are woefully undermanned and under funded to deal with this issue? Are you aware of the FACT that the Marines were requested to assist with Border operations but due to certain bylaws were not allowed by congress to do so?

It is my guess that you really aren't all that familiar with what is actually happening in Arizona, but you're "offended" by the law passed there regardless. Right? Did you know that according to almost every poll taken, the majority of people are FOR the new law? That's nationwide, not just in Arizona.

Ironically, as I stated above, I am not. I don't feel it will adequately address the true problem, and will instead "criminalize" the wrong people. But that's not what you expected to hear, is it.

The truth is, you jumped on a line of thought and refused to budge, despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary. In a post previously I showed how you were completely off the mark in 5 1/2 of 7 points you posted about me. Now, I've shown that you took a popular "hot button" topic at face value without any understanding of the actual issue. Maybe it's time you reassessed your positions here.

Caine

lol... spoken like a true "tea partier"

I'm guessing you think lynch mobs should be brought back too.

C Mac You absolutely amaze me! you cry how we should be tolerant and the Arizona law is discriminatory. You blast the police and make blanket stements against them BASED ON MAINSTREAM MEDIA! NO EVIDENCE!! It doesn't sound like you have done any investigation on your own but you just listen to rumors and your nughtly news. Make a condescending remark about people involved with the tea party movement all the while acting like you want everyone else to get together and sing CUMBIAH MY LORD. Although IMO you sound like the type who thinks they should take my lord out of that song.

What is wrong with the tennats of the tea party movement, Do you knwo what they aspouse?

Where to I quote mainstream media? lol... keep watching Fox news bud.

There is a reason Seattle and LA (among others) are boycotting Arizona. Honestly, I can't be held liable for your ignorance. Don't attack me because you and some bigot don't understand the law.

Caine
05-20-2010, 12:58 PM
C Mac D wrote:

Caine wrote:

C Mac D wrote:

LOL... I definitely read it. Of course you wouldn't come right out and support it, that law is the definition of racism ... yet you go on to justify the law and say you think it will work. I wonder what your opinion behind closed door.

(and yes I understand the law, ive ha many conversations with a California highway patrol officer about it... my uncle... and he said its blatant racism and goes against evrything this country is founded on. Caries, sorry if I take his opinion over yours.... LOL.)

No, I said I do NOT think it will work. See, operative word here is "NOT".

But hey, feel free to continue to misquote me and attribute things to me that are neither written nor implied.

Caine

So, you're against blatant racism, but can justify it? Odd.

It's should be obvious to anyone but you that no matter what I say you will try to twist it to be something bad...and fail miserably in the process.

I clearly stated that I don't think the law will work...i.e. I am AGAINST it.

However, since the law CLEARLY reads that "It requires police, in the context of enforcing other laws, to question people about their immigration status if there's reason to suspect they are in the country illegally." it is also clearly NOT a racist law...not in and of itself. See, nowhere does the law say that the Police can randomly ask "suspicious" people for papers...they have to already be in contact for some other reason. In other words, if they arrest someone for distributing drugs, they can ask for proof of citizenship if they have reason to believe that the person is here illegally.

A Racist law would simply target a person based upon race, and for no other reason.

Regardless, I do NOT agree with the law - despite the FACT that the MAJORITY of American's DO. I think it is a waste of time, and is essentially a copy of laws already on the books that are unenforced for financial reasons.

And you want to twist that to mean I'm racist? You are so blind it's laughable.

Caine

Mr Anderson
05-20-2010, 01:01 PM
Caine wrote:

C Mac D wrote:

Caine wrote:

C Mac D wrote:

LOL... I definitely read it. Of course you wouldn't come right out and support it, that law is the definition of racism ... yet you go on to justify the law and say you think it will work. I wonder what your opinion behind closed door.

(and yes I understand the law, ive ha many conversations with a California highway patrol officer about it... my uncle... and he said its blatant racism and goes against evrything this country is founded on. Caries, sorry if I take his opinion over yours.... LOL.)

No, I said I do NOT think it will work. See, operative word here is "NOT".

But hey, feel free to continue to misquote me and attribute things to me that are neither written nor implied.

Caine

So, you're against blatant racism, but can justify it? Odd.

It's should be obvious to anyone but you that no matter what I say you will try to twist it to be something bad...and fail miserably in the process.

I clearly stated that I don't think the law will work...i.e. I am AGAINST it.

However, since the law CLEARLY reads that "It requires police, in the context of enforcing other laws, to question people about their immigration status if there's reason to suspect they are in the country illegally." it is also clearly NOT a racist law...not in and of itself. See, nowhere does the law say that the Police can randomly ask "suspicious" people for papers...they have to already be in contact for some other reason. In other words, if they arrest someone for distributing drugs, they can ask for proof of citizenship if they have reason to believe that the person is here illegally.

A Racist law would simply target a person based upon race, and for no other reason.

Regardless, I do NOT agree with the law - despite the FACT that the MAJORITY of American's DO. I think it is a waste of time, and is essentially a copy of laws already on the books that are unenforced for financial reasons.

And you want to twist that to mean I'm racist? You are so blind it's laughable.

Caine
I've never heard that Caine.

Thanks for the info. I thought the law justified stops based on suspicion of illegal immigration alone.


So what does this law even do? If you can't identify yourself to a cop it doesn't matter if you're a citizen or not, you can be arrested. And that's probably not so easy if you're illegal.

Caine
05-20-2010, 01:04 PM
C Mac D wrote:

tarkenton10 wrote:

C Mac D wrote:

Caine wrote:

C Mac D wrote:

tarkenton10 wrote:

What is that sentence suppose to mean? And it is very condescending, much of the reason for people finging you arrogant and distastful! Waht does Arizona have todo with being a racist?

It was in response to this comment:

tarkenton10 wrote:

I do agree with one point that officers follow protocol and it is a step by step process, they do not look at anyone's age, creed or color. You follow their directions or they go to the next step in protocol; that's it.

Then I said:

C Mac D wrote:

lol... don't pay attention to the news much? Arizona ring a bell?

Because the recently passed laws in Arizona prove that police are doing everything you claim they are not. That is all.

I'm sorry, when did it become the Police who pass laws?

They don't. They are charged with ENFORCING them.

Here is my first, and hopefully last, comment on the Arizona situation on PPO.

The law clearly states that if the Police have REASONABLE SUSPICION, they are to ascertain the citizenship status of the individual in question. There's that damn term, Reasonable Suspicion. Defined, that means that a REASONABLE person under the SAME CIRCUMSTANCES would suspect the SAME THING. This isn't blind witch hunting or racial profiling (As some like to charge).

Now, is this new law really going to improve the situation in Arizona? I doubt it. It is already against the law to be in this country illegally - we simply can't enforce it. Criminalizing it won't really have a positive effect because it STILL comes down to FUNDING. It costs MONEY to deport Illegals, money that tax payers DON'T want to spend. Further, businesses that hire those same illegals will be forced to pay a higher wage (and taxes, FICA, etc) to replace those workers - which drives UP their prices.

The TRUTH is, C Mac, you haven't the foggiest notion about what you're talking about - not an uncommon position for you. You are so busy trying to persecute me, or the Police, that you blindly ignore the facts around you.

I think the law in Arizona is not going to work - SURPRISE!!! You likely believed I was going to be all for it, lining up with my baton to club the next "suspicious person"...nope.

At the same time, what do you know about the problems Arizona is facing, and WHY they passed this law? Are you aware of the American civilians who have been killed or run off their land by drug cartels who are trafficking BLATANTLY across the borders? National Geographic did an excellent story about it almost 3 years ago...and it's only getting worse. Are you aware of the FACT that the local police and the Border Patrol are woefully undermanned and under funded to deal with this issue? Are you aware of the FACT that the Marines were requested to assist with Border operations but due to certain bylaws were not allowed by congress to do so?

It is my guess that you really aren't all that familiar with what is actually happening in Arizona, but you're "offended" by the law passed there regardless. Right? Did you know that according to almost every poll taken, the majority of people are FOR the new law? That's nationwide, not just in Arizona.

Ironically, as I stated above, I am not. I don't feel it will adequately address the true problem, and will instead "criminalize" the wrong people. But that's not what you expected to hear, is it.

The truth is, you jumped on a line of thought and refused to budge, despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary. In a post previously I showed how you were completely off the mark in 5 1/2 of 7 points you posted about me. Now, I've shown that you took a popular "hot button" topic at face value without any understanding of the actual issue. Maybe it's time you reassessed your positions here.

Caine

lol... spoken like a true "tea partier"

I'm guessing you think lynch mobs should be brought back too.

C Mac You absolutely amaze me! you cry how we should be tolerant and the Arizona law is discriminatory. You blast the police and make blanket stements against them BASED ON MAINSTREAM MEDIA! NO EVIDENCE!! It doesn't sound like you have done any investigation on your own but you just listen to rumors and your nughtly news. Make a condescending remark about people involved with the tea party movement all the while acting like you want everyone else to get together and sing CUMBIAH MY LORD. Although IMO you sound like the type who thinks they should take my lord out of that song.

What is wrong with the tennats of the tea party movement, Do you knwo what they aspouse?

Where to I quote mainstream media? lol... keep watching Fox news bud.

There is a reason Seattle and LA (among others) are boycotting Arizona. Honestly, I can't be held liable for your ignorance. Don't attack me because you and some bigot don't understand the law.

Now you're blatantly calling me a bigot?

And you claim "I" don't understand the law?

I have cited not only the law, but the scenarios under which it may be applied, as well as the reasons and motivations for it...all while stating VERY CLEARLY that I DISAGREE with it.

And all YOU have done is name call.

You really are a piece of work.

Caine

V4L
05-20-2010, 01:08 PM
If they have nothing to hide coming over the border then they should have no problem being stopped at the border

NDVikingFan66
05-20-2010, 01:13 PM
OK....everyone here knows the rules, but allow me to reiterate just a couple.

1. NO POLITICS
2. NO NAME CALLING

This thread has clearly been hijacked by both. Clean it up, or the thread goes away.

Thank you.

Prophet
05-20-2010, 01:15 PM
http://www.wsbtv.com/video/23438021/index.html

http://www.wsbtv.com/video/23438712/index.html

As long as you're talking about AZ and it's law, wouldn't hurt to watch these videos.

ultravikingfan
05-20-2010, 01:22 PM
Ok...I do believe we have to policies at stake here:

1. No politics
2. No personal attcks

It is a long offseason and I am sure some are at wits end.

Let's play nicely.