The National Football League
Comments
-
The Juggler wrote: »The Juggler wrote: »The Juggler wrote: »ah good ole Juggler. only he could say something can't be done even after it was done. respect the stubbornness though big guy. probably doesn't think we can land a man on the moon even though we already did it
)
ous.
Sorry pal. Your dream of teams throwing the ball 80% of the time, consistently, will never, ever happen. Occasionally if the defense proves they cannot stop something, the other team should exploit it to death like the Pats did in the second half on Saturday. When you have one of the best qbs to ever play the game going up against a makeshift secondary, this becomes easier to do. Unfortunately most teams don't have one of the best qb's to ever play the game going up against that kind of a secondary, which is one of the reasons this hardly happens--case in point, every other playoff game thus far this year. Exceptions to rules, tend to happen sometimes.
Folks, keep in mind, this is a guy who wanted to throw the ball 80% of the time with one, Michael Vick under center. Completely idiotic.
ah never let the facts get in the way of a rant. never once did i say the Eagles with Michael Vick should throw the ball 80% of the time. i said my ideal offense, under today's passing rules, would throw that ball that much.
repeat ZERO rushes in a half but you have to run because the d would tee off on your quarterback haha too fucking funny
.
Fella, did you see any other team not run the ball once in a half yesterday, Saturday, or in any of the 4 games last week? You saw a hall of fame quarterback do that against a banged up secondary who was unable to stop him. I don't know what your point is. Do you think this is the ideal way to win football games? By not running the ball once? Go peak your head into the Patriots thread and ask them if that is a consistent recipe for success. Go ask any Cowboy fan how their newfound reliance on their running game got them to 12 wins, and a playoff win after years of an out of whack run/pass ratio netted them nothing but mediocre football.
There have been 16 halves of football played this post season. 15 of them featured mostly balanced run/pass ratios (60-40% or so). You see one that doesn't (with a hall of fame qb and a banged up secondary) and you somehow think that proves something. hahaha
And yeah, you wanted Reid to throw the ball over 40 times a game with Mike Vick. Thus, the genesis of this stupid argument that you bring up over and over again. Idiocy. This isn't arena football.
i guess i shouldn't expect the guy who a few years ago said the Pats were winning because of Steven Ridley running the football and not because they had Tom Brady as their QB to fully grasp the concept that a pass by Tom Brady is always better for the Pats and worse for the defense. always.
throwing the ball 80% of the time will never win you anything other than an arena bowl championship. beat it with this nonsense.
except a playoff game against a really good defensive team just last week . ah so much for facts
You keep harping on this 1 game as your argument. Please list all the other examples where teams throwing 80% of the time has been a success.
0 -
Why would you want Fox in Buffalo? I don't think he is a good fit at all, and I would consider his job in Denver to be a pretty colossal failure. That team is stacked.
He's taken 2 different teams to the super bowl. The guy is a good coach. All Rex has done was take Manginis team to the AFC championship game twice. The fit may not be something you like, but our problem is with the offense, not the defense.0 -
Worst sports fan in all of sports? The big 10 doesn't even have the worst fans in college football (SEC).0
-
Indifference71 wrote: »The Juggler wrote: »The Juggler wrote: »The Juggler wrote: »ah good ole Juggler. only he could say something can't be done even after it was done. respect the stubbornness though big guy. probably doesn't think we can land a man on the moon even though we already did it)
ous.
Sorry pal. Your dream of teams throwing the ball 80% of the time, consistently, will never, ever happen. Occasionally if the defense proves they cannot stop something, the other team should exploit it to death like the Pats did in the second half on Saturday. When you have one of the best qbs to ever play the game going up against a makeshift secondary, this becomes easier to do. Unfortunately most teams don't have one of the best qb's to ever play the game going up against that kind of a secondary, which is one of the reasons this hardly happens--case in point, every other playoff game thus far this year. Exceptions to rules, tend to happen sometimes.
Folks, keep in mind, this is a guy who wanted to throw the ball 80% of the time with one, Michael Vick under center. Completely idiotic.
ah never let the facts get in the way of a rant. never once did i say the Eagles with Michael Vick should throw the ball 80% of the time. i said my ideal offense, under today's passing rules, would throw that ball that much.
repeat ZERO rushes in a half but you have to run because the d would tee off on your quarterback haha too fucking funny
.
Fella, did you see any other team not run the ball once in a half yesterday, Saturday, or in any of the 4 games last week? You saw a hall of fame quarterback do that against a banged up secondary who was unable to stop him. I don't know what your point is. Do you think this is the ideal way to win football games? By not running the ball once? Go peak your head into the Patriots thread and ask them if that is a consistent recipe for success. Go ask any Cowboy fan how their newfound reliance on their running game got them to 12 wins, and a playoff win after years of an out of whack run/pass ratio netted them nothing but mediocre football.
There have been 16 halves of football played this post season. 15 of them featured mostly balanced run/pass ratios (60-40% or so). You see one that doesn't (with a hall of fame qb and a banged up secondary) and you somehow think that proves something. hahaha
And yeah, you wanted Reid to throw the ball over 40 times a game with Mike Vick. Thus, the genesis of this stupid argument that you bring up over and over again. Idiocy. This isn't arena football.
i guess i shouldn't expect the guy who a few years ago said the Pats were winning because of Steven Ridley running the football and not because they had Tom Brady as their QB to fully grasp the concept that a pass by Tom Brady is always better for the Pats and worse for the defense. always.
throwing the ball 80% of the time will never win you anything other than an arena bowl championship. beat it with this nonsense.
except a playoff game against a really good defensive team just last week . ah so much for facts
You keep harping on this 1 game as your argument. Please list all the other examples where teams throwing 80% of the time has been a success.
He's been having this exact same argument with me for 6 years. I've suffered multiple concussions from slamming my head against the wall so many times.www.myspace.com0 -
Last-12-Exit wrote: »Why would you want Fox in Buffalo? I don't think he is a good fit at all, and I would consider his job in Denver to be a pretty colossal failure. That team is stacked.
He's taken 2 different teams to the super bowl. The guy is a good coach. All Rex has done was take Manginis team to the AFC championship game twice. The fit may not be something you like, but our problem is with the offense, not the defense.
well, Fox isn't an offensive coach either. His expertise is in defense.
That Denver team got all the pieces someone could possibly want to win a Superbowl. Offense and Defense. They have nothing to show for it. Fox isn't a bad coach, Id even consider him good. The smoke and mirrors team with Tebow was masterful. However, he isn't a guy I would want to drop everything and run and go get.
You keep saying that Ryan just was lucky he followed Mangini, but he took an average defense under Mangini, and were the #1 defense his 1st season, #6 his second, and #4 his 3rd. Is Mangini even working anywhere or being considered as a head coach anywhere?
Its obvious you have some sort of blind hatred for Rex Ryan. He is a good coach. The situation in New York was awful and mainly due to shitty ownership and GM. I have friends who are Jets fans who are still very high on Ryan, were sad to see him go, and very sad to see him go to a rival. He is a players' coach which is needed in Buffalo to rebrand themselves to members of the NFLPA as a place players may want to consider, and also repair some bad morale the existing players have with their existing coach bolting.
He isnt my first choice, I was hoping to dip into the college ranks and get Malzahn, Briles, or Sumlin, but it doesnt seem like those guys are making the jump yet. NFL guys available, Ryan is/was my 1st choice. None of the coordinators got me excited, and definitely did not want the Shanahans or Trestman.
0 -
They should keep Fox and get rid of Peyton.Another habit says it's in love with you
Another habit says its long overdue
Another habit like an unwanted friend
I'm so happy with my righteous self0 -
Last-12-Exit wrote: »Why would you want Fox in Buffalo? I don't think he is a good fit at all, and I would consider his job in Denver to be a pretty colossal failure. That team is stacked.
He's taken 2 different teams to the super bowl. The guy is a good coach. All Rex has done was take Manginis team to the AFC championship game twice. The fit may not be something you like, but our problem is with the offense, not the defense.
well, Fox isn't an offensive coach either. His expertise is in defense.
That Denver team got all the pieces someone could possibly want to win a Superbowl. Offense and Defense. They have nothing to show for it. Fox isn't a bad coach, Id even consider him good. The smoke and mirrors team with Tebow was masterful. However, he isn't a guy I would want to drop everything and run and go get.
You keep saying that Ryan just was lucky he followed Mangini, but he took an average defense under Mangini, and were the #1 defense his 1st season, #6 his second, and #4 his 3rd. Is Mangini even working anywhere or being considered as a head coach anywhere?
Its obvious you have some sort of blind hatred for Rex Ryan. He is a good coach. The situation in New York was awful and mainly due to shitty ownership and GM. I have friends who are Jets fans who are still very high on Ryan, were sad to see him go, and very sad to see him go to a rival. He is a players' coach which is needed in Buffalo to rebrand themselves to members of the NFLPA as a place players may want to consider, and also repair some bad morale the existing players have with their existing coach bolting.
He isnt my first choice, I was hoping to dip into the college ranks and get Malzahn, Briles, or Sumlin, but it doesnt seem like those guys are making the jump yet. NFL guys available, Ryan is/was my 1st choice. None of the coordinators got me excited, and definitely did not want the Shanahans or Trestman.
No, it's not a blind hatred. At all in fact. He's a good defensive coach. He's a top notch defensive coordinator. But he's not a good head coach. I hope I'm wrong. I want to see buffalo win. But history has shown that Rex can't win consistently.
I agree with you about the lack of good options now. But that's why you wait until after the super bowl.0 -
Denver had all the pieces. But they didn't play to their potential on Sunday. Their pro bowlers looked like rookies. The offensive play calling wasn't good.I miss igotid880
-
-
I don't have any blind hatred for Ryan and I do agree he was hamstrung by his superiors the last couple of seasons. I understand fully why many Buffalo fans are rightfully excited by his hiring. I would be too.
That said, looking back on his Jets tenure as a whole, the media attention he got did not correlate to his team's performance on the field. Yes, he reached two AFC title games and yes he sometimes played the Patriots tough. To my mind that is not enough to warrant quickly hiring him the way Pegula did. Not saying he will be a failure in Buffalo, just that he is no guaranteed lock to turn things around.
What is guaranteed is that the Bills media profile will definitely be raised with Ryan in the fold. That will help with any plans to get a stadium built. I wonder how much that factored into the decision to pounce the way they did.___________________________________________
"...I changed by not changing at all..."0 -
Indifference71 wrote: »
Yes, if Manning had been able to hit some of those open receivers deep the game would have been very different. But the coaches also needed to know what he was and wasn't able to do. If he had been unable to complete those passes in practice they should have never been called during the game.
With Manning though you never know who called the play. He may have audibled into those throws.
___________________________________________
"...I changed by not changing at all..."0 -
Indifference71 wrote: »The Juggler wrote: »The Juggler wrote: »The Juggler wrote: »ah good ole Juggler. only he could say something can't be done even after it was done. respect the stubbornness though big guy. probably doesn't think we can land a man on the moon even though we already did it)
ous.
Sorry pal. Your dream of teams throwing the ball 80% of the time, consistently, will never, ever happen. Occasionally if the defense proves they cannot stop something, the other team should exploit it to death like the Pats did in the second half on Saturday. When you have one of the best qbs to ever play the game going up against a makeshift secondary, this becomes easier to do. Unfortunately most teams don't have one of the best qb's to ever play the game going up against that kind of a secondary, which is one of the reasons this hardly happens--case in point, every other playoff game thus far this year. Exceptions to rules, tend to happen sometimes.
Folks, keep in mind, this is a guy who wanted to throw the ball 80% of the time with one, Michael Vick under center. Completely idiotic.
ah never let the facts get in the way of a rant. never once did i say the Eagles with Michael Vick should throw the ball 80% of the time. i said my ideal offense, under today's passing rules, would throw that ball that much.
repeat ZERO rushes in a half but you have to run because the d would tee off on your quarterback haha too fucking funny
.
Fella, did you see any other team not run the ball once in a half yesterday, Saturday, or in any of the 4 games last week? You saw a hall of fame quarterback do that against a banged up secondary who was unable to stop him. I don't know what your point is. Do you think this is the ideal way to win football games? By not running the ball once? Go peak your head into the Patriots thread and ask them if that is a consistent recipe for success. Go ask any Cowboy fan how their newfound reliance on their running game got them to 12 wins, and a playoff win after years of an out of whack run/pass ratio netted them nothing but mediocre football.
There have been 16 halves of football played this post season. 15 of them featured mostly balanced run/pass ratios (60-40% or so). You see one that doesn't (with a hall of fame qb and a banged up secondary) and you somehow think that proves something. hahaha
And yeah, you wanted Reid to throw the ball over 40 times a game with Mike Vick. Thus, the genesis of this stupid argument that you bring up over and over again. Idiocy. This isn't arena football.
i guess i shouldn't expect the guy who a few years ago said the Pats were winning because of Steven Ridley running the football and not because they had Tom Brady as their QB to fully grasp the concept that a pass by Tom Brady is always better for the Pats and worse for the defense. always.
throwing the ball 80% of the time will never win you anything other than an arena bowl championship. beat it with this nonsense.
except a playoff game against a really good defensive team just last week . ah so much for facts
You keep harping on this 1 game as your argument. Please list all the other examples where teams throwing 80% of the time has been a success.
when someone insists something can't be done and it's done, even just 1 time, then said someone was wrong. not a hard concept to understand.
either way i'm just having a little fun...so lighten up
0 -
Indifference71 wrote: »The Juggler wrote: »The Juggler wrote: »The Juggler wrote: »ah good ole Juggler. only he could say something can't be done even after it was done. respect the stubbornness though big guy. probably doesn't think we can land a man on the moon even though we already did it)
ous.
Sorry pal. Your dream of teams throwing the ball 80% of the time, consistently, will never, ever happen. Occasionally if the defense proves they cannot stop something, the other team should exploit it to death like the Pats did in the second half on Saturday. When you have one of the best qbs to ever play the game going up against a makeshift secondary, this becomes easier to do. Unfortunately most teams don't have one of the best qb's to ever play the game going up against that kind of a secondary, which is one of the reasons this hardly happens--case in point, every other playoff game thus far this year. Exceptions to rules, tend to happen sometimes.
Folks, keep in mind, this is a guy who wanted to throw the ball 80% of the time with one, Michael Vick under center. Completely idiotic.
ah never let the facts get in the way of a rant. never once did i say the Eagles with Michael Vick should throw the ball 80% of the time. i said my ideal offense, under today's passing rules, would throw that ball that much.
repeat ZERO rushes in a half but you have to run because the d would tee off on your quarterback haha too fucking funny
.
Fella, did you see any other team not run the ball once in a half yesterday, Saturday, or in any of the 4 games last week? You saw a hall of fame quarterback do that against a banged up secondary who was unable to stop him. I don't know what your point is. Do you think this is the ideal way to win football games? By not running the ball once? Go peak your head into the Patriots thread and ask them if that is a consistent recipe for success. Go ask any Cowboy fan how their newfound reliance on their running game got them to 12 wins, and a playoff win after years of an out of whack run/pass ratio netted them nothing but mediocre football.
There have been 16 halves of football played this post season. 15 of them featured mostly balanced run/pass ratios (60-40% or so). You see one that doesn't (with a hall of fame qb and a banged up secondary) and you somehow think that proves something. hahaha
And yeah, you wanted Reid to throw the ball over 40 times a game with Mike Vick. Thus, the genesis of this stupid argument that you bring up over and over again. Idiocy. This isn't arena football.
i guess i shouldn't expect the guy who a few years ago said the Pats were winning because of Steven Ridley running the football and not because they had Tom Brady as their QB to fully grasp the concept that a pass by Tom Brady is always better for the Pats and worse for the defense. always.
throwing the ball 80% of the time will never win you anything other than an arena bowl championship. beat it with this nonsense.
except a playoff game against a really good defensive team just last week . ah so much for facts
You keep harping on this 1 game as your argument. Please list all the other examples where teams throwing 80% of the time has been a success.
when someone insists something can't be done and it's done, even just 1 time, then said someone was wrong. not a hard concept to understand.
either way i'm just having a little fun...so lighten up
It's something that has not and will never be done consistently in this league. There are exceptions to every rule, though. And the second half on Saturday, featuring a hall of fame qb, down 14 points, against a banged up secondary qualifies as your exception. Every other half of football this post season constitutes the rule.
And I had no idea you were kidding because it's the same argument you've tried to make for years and you seemed pretty serious about it as usual!Post edited by The Juggler onwww.myspace.com0 -
Elway starts his press conference by thanking himself. Slip of the tongue, sure, but still...he's a jackass.___________________________________________
"...I changed by not changing at all..."0 -
Post edited by MayDay10 on0 -
The entire Denver Bronco organization and fanbase has forgotten the past when Homer Simpson was disappointed when Hank Scorpio gave him the franchise. I think they shall find out very soon that history repeats and they shall find out that maybe winning 12-14 games a year was actually a pretty good thing to experience. A Bronco website put up a poll if they wanted Manning back next year and 58% said no.
I hope he doesn't come back.
Be Excellent To Each OtherParty On, Dudes!0 -
OuchAnother habit says it's in love with you
Another habit says its long overdue
Another habit like an unwanted friend
I'm so happy with my righteous self0 -
The entire Denver Bronco organization and fanbase has forgotten the past when Homer Simpson was disappointed when Hank Scorpio gave him the franchise. I think they shall find out very soon that history repeats and they shall find out that maybe winning 12-14 games a year was actually a pretty good thing to experience. A Bronco website put up a poll if they wanted Manning back next year and 58% said no.
I hope he doesn't come back and they understand that there are about ten people in the world that are competent enough to properly run a NFL offense.
Be Excellent To Each OtherParty On, Dudes!0 -
fucking quote feature ... :-?Be Excellent To Each OtherParty On, Dudes!0
Categories
- All Categories
- 148.8K Pearl Jam's Music and Activism
- 110K The Porch
- 274 Vitalogy
- 35K Given To Fly (live)
- 3.5K Words and Music...Communication
- 39.1K Flea Market
- 39.1K Lost Dogs
- 58.7K Not Pearl Jam's Music
- 10.6K Musicians and Gearheads
- 29.1K Other Music
- 17.8K Poetry, Prose, Music & Art
- 1.1K The Art Wall
- 56.8K Non-Pearl Jam Discussion
- 22.2K A Moving Train
- 31.7K All Encompassing Trip
- 2.9K Technical Stuff and Help