Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 30 of 30
  1. #21
    cajunvike's Avatar
    cajunvike is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    32,063

    Re: Was dealing for Derrick Harvey worth it for the Jags?

    "V" wrote:
    "marstc09" wrote:
    "V" wrote:
    "Mr-holland" wrote:
    They were really foolish but they could have been right.
    They are right when Harvey becomes the best DE in the game ( Allen is the best right now ) or if Allen goes drinking and driving again. Maybe they did not want to take the risk bringing in a guy who has/had a problem with that
    This is not Allen vs. Harvey in any way. This is two different scenarios of a team addressing their need. It just happens to be the same position, but its not like the teams were picking between the two.

    Before the Allen trade, we were saying lets get an OT and get a DE later in the draft. We knew Harvey was out of reach. Also, Allen never even visited Jacksonville. He wasn't even on their radar.

    So, I don't think they're foolish at all. Harvey doesn't have to become the best DE in the game for them to be right. Even if Allen blows it, the Jags are still wrong if Harvey doesn't pan out. To be optimistic, both teams may have made the right move for their franchise.
    Your right they are different. They gave up more for a draft pick than we did for a Pro Bowl vet. We came out better IMO. They had a choice and they choose to address in the draft and we choose Allen. What makes it worse is that they gave up a lot to get Harvey.
    Two times in a row you ignored the entire post just to highlight the last sentence in an effort to prevent you from doing it again I have created a run on sentence so you are forced to respond to the entire thing so first of all I agree we came out better but that does not mean the Jags came out horrible this is not us vs. them as I said before second of all just as they are wondering will he be a bust or a stud we are wondering will he be a star or a drunk to Cajun I still have not seen the criticisn of the Allen trade which you refer to to Cojo that is a bit off topic don't you think?
    http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=hill/080425&sportCat=nfl

    http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2008/writers/don_banks/04/23/snaps/index.html

    I could look for more...but alot of the criticism came from TV analysts and I can't find clips.
    BANNED OR DEAD...I'LL TAKE EITHER ONE

  2. #22
    marstc09's Avatar
    marstc09 is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    Phoenix, Arizona
    Posts
    23,179

    Re: Was dealing for Derrick Harvey worth it for the Jags?

    "V" wrote:
    "marstc09" wrote:
    "V" wrote:
    "Mr-holland" wrote:
    They were really foolish but they could have been right.
    They are right when Harvey becomes the best DE in the game ( Allen is the best right now ) or if Allen goes drinking and driving again. Maybe they did not want to take the risk bringing in a guy who has/had a problem with that
    This is not Allen vs. Harvey in any way. This is two different scenarios of a team addressing their need. It just happens to be the same position, but its not like the teams were picking between the two.

    Before the Allen trade, we were saying lets get an OT and get a DE later in the draft. We knew Harvey was out of reach. Also, Allen never even visited Jacksonville. He wasn't even on their radar.

    So, I don't think they're foolish at all. Harvey doesn't have to become the best DE in the game for them to be right. Even if Allen blows it, the Jags are still wrong if Harvey doesn't pan out. To be optimistic, both teams may have made the right move for their franchise.
    Your right they are different. They gave up more for a draft pick than we did for a Pro Bowl vet. We came out better IMO. They had a choice and they choose to address in the draft and we choose Allen. What makes it worse is that they gave up a lot to get Harvey.
    Two times in a row you ignored the entire post just to highlight the last sentence in an effort to prevent you from doing it again I have created a run on sentence so you are forced to respond to the entire thing so first of all I agree we came out better but that does not mean the Jags came out horrible this is not us vs. them as I said before second of all just as they are wondering will he be a bust or a stud we are wondering will he be a star or a drunk to Cajun I still have not seen the criticisn of the Allen trade which you refer to to Cojo that is a bit off topic don't you think?
    I don't know what the fuck you are talking about.


    Edit: IMHO we have less to worry about.

  3. #23
    dcboardr41 is offline Team Alumni
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    3,051

    Re: Was dealing for Derrick Harvey worth it for the Jags?

    "marstc09" wrote:
    "V" wrote:
    "marstc09" wrote:
    "V" wrote:
    "Mr-holland" wrote:
    They were really foolish but they could have been right.
    They are right when Harvey becomes the best DE in the game ( Allen is the best right now ) or if Allen goes drinking and driving again. Maybe they did not want to take the risk bringing in a guy who has/had a problem with that
    This is not Allen vs. Harvey in any way. This is two different scenarios of a team addressing their need. It just happens to be the same position, but its not like the teams were picking between the two.

    Before the Allen trade, we were saying lets get an OT and get a DE later in the draft. We knew Harvey was out of reach. Also, Allen never even visited Jacksonville. He wasn't even on their radar.

    So, I don't think they're foolish at all. Harvey doesn't have to become the best DE in the game for them to be right. Even if Allen blows it, the Jags are still wrong if Harvey doesn't pan out. To be optimistic, both teams may have made the right move for their franchise.
    Your right they are different. They gave up more for a draft pick than we did for a Pro Bowl vet. We came out better IMO. They had a choice and they choose to address in the draft and we choose Allen. What makes it worse is that they gave up a lot to get Harvey.
    Two times in a row you ignored the entire post just to highlight the last sentence in an effort to prevent you from doing it again I have created a run on sentence so you are forced to respond to the entire thing so first of all I agree we came out better but that does not mean the Jags came out horrible this is not us vs. them as I said before second of all just as they are wondering will he be a bust or a stud we are wondering will he be a star or a drunk to Cajun I still have not seen the criticisn of the Allen trade which you refer to to Cojo that is a bit off topic don't you think?
    I don't know what the fuck you are talking about.


    Edit: IMHO we have less to worry about.
    the topic of this thread has nothing to do with us at, its about the jags, lets not make it about us

    Pissing on the Pack since 08'

  4. #24
    marstc09's Avatar
    marstc09 is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    Phoenix, Arizona
    Posts
    23,179

    Re: Was dealing for Derrick Harvey worth it for the Jags?

    "dcboardr41" wrote:
    "marstc09" wrote:
    "V" wrote:
    "marstc09" wrote:
    "V" wrote:
    [quote author=Mr-holland link=topic=45561.msg790353#msg790353 date=1213047934]
    They were really foolish but they could have been right.
    They are right when Harvey becomes the best DE in the game ( Allen is the best right now ) or if Allen goes drinking and driving again. Maybe they did not want to take the risk bringing in a guy who has/had a problem with that
    This is not Allen vs. Harvey in any way. This is two different scenarios of a team addressing their need. It just happens to be the same position, but its not like the teams were picking between the two.

    Before the Allen trade, we were saying lets get an OT and get a DE later in the draft. We knew Harvey was out of reach. Also, Allen never even visited Jacksonville. He wasn't even on their radar.

    So, I don't think they're foolish at all. Harvey doesn't have to become the best DE in the game for them to be right. Even if Allen blows it, the Jags are still wrong if Harvey doesn't pan out. To be optimistic, both teams may have made the right move for their franchise.
    Your right they are different. They gave up more for a draft pick than we did for a Pro Bowl vet. We came out better IMO. They had a choice and they choose to address in the draft and we choose Allen. What makes it worse is that they gave up a lot to get Harvey.
    Two times in a row you ignored the entire post just to highlight the last sentence in an effort to prevent you from doing it again I have created a run on sentence so you are forced to respond to the entire thing so first of all I agree we came out better but that does not mean the Jags came out horrible this is not us vs. them as I said before second of all just as they are wondering will he be a bust or a stud we are wondering will he be a star or a drunk to Cajun I still have not seen the criticisn of the Allen trade which you refer to to Cojo that is a bit off topic don't you think?
    I don't know what the fuck you are talking about.


    Edit: IMHO we have less to worry about.
    the topic of this thread has nothing to do with us at, its about the jags, lets not make it about us

    [/quote]

    Your right. IMHO the Jags gave away too much for Harvey.

  5. #25
    dcboardr41 is offline Team Alumni
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    3,051

    Re: Was dealing for Derrick Harvey worth it for the Jags?

    "marstc09" wrote:
    "dcboardr41" wrote:
    "marstc09" wrote:
    "V" wrote:
    "marstc09" wrote:
    [quote author=V link=topic=45561.msg790654#msg790654 date=1213103330]
    [quote author=Mr-holland link=topic=45561.msg790353#msg790353 date=1213047934]
    They were really foolish but they could have been right.
    They are right when Harvey becomes the best DE in the game ( Allen is the best right now ) or if Allen goes drinking and driving again. Maybe they did not want to take the risk bringing in a guy who has/had a problem with that
    This is not Allen vs. Harvey in any way. This is two different scenarios of a team addressing their need. It just happens to be the same position, but its not like the teams were picking between the two.

    Before the Allen trade, we were saying lets get an OT and get a DE later in the draft. We knew Harvey was out of reach. Also, Allen never even visited Jacksonville. He wasn't even on their radar.

    So, I don't think they're foolish at all. Harvey doesn't have to become the best DE in the game for them to be right. Even if Allen blows it, the Jags are still wrong if Harvey doesn't pan out. To be optimistic, both teams may have made the right move for their franchise.
    Your right they are different. They gave up more for a draft pick than we did for a Pro Bowl vet. We came out better IMO. They had a choice and they choose to address in the draft and we choose Allen. What makes it worse is that they gave up a lot to get Harvey.
    Two times in a row you ignored the entire post just to highlight the last sentence in an effort to prevent you from doing it again I have created a run on sentence so you are forced to respond to the entire thing so first of all I agree we came out better but that does not mean the Jags came out horrible this is not us vs. them as I said before second of all just as they are wondering will he be a bust or a stud we are wondering will he be a star or a drunk to Cajun I still have not seen the criticisn of the Allen trade which you refer to to Cojo that is a bit off topic don't you think?
    I don't know what the fuck you are talking about.


    Edit: IMHO we have less to worry about.
    the topic of this thread has nothing to do with us at, its about the jags, lets not make it about us

    [/quote]

    Your right. IMHO the Jags gave away too much for Harvey.
    [/quote]

    IMHO +1 lol

    Pissing on the Pack since 08'

  6. #26
    V-Unit's Avatar
    V-Unit is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    6,317

    Re: Was dealing for Derrick Harvey worth it for the Jags?

    "dcboardr41" wrote:
    "marstc09" wrote:
    "dcboardr41" wrote:
    "marstc09" wrote:
    "V" wrote:
    [quote author=marstc09 link=topic=45561.msg790856#msg790856 date=1213133282]
    [quote author=V link=topic=45561.msg790654#msg790654 date=1213103330]
    [quote author=Mr-holland link=topic=45561.msg790353#msg790353 date=1213047934]
    They were really foolish but they could have been right.
    They are right when Harvey becomes the best DE in the game ( Allen is the best right now ) or if Allen goes drinking and driving again. Maybe they did not want to take the risk bringing in a guy who has/had a problem with that
    This is not Allen vs. Harvey in any way. This is two different scenarios of a team addressing their need. It just happens to be the same position, but its not like the teams were picking between the two.

    Before the Allen trade, we were saying lets get an OT and get a DE later in the draft. We knew Harvey was out of reach. Also, Allen never even visited Jacksonville. He wasn't even on their radar.

    So, I don't think they're foolish at all. Harvey doesn't have to become the best DE in the game for them to be right. Even if Allen blows it, the Jags are still wrong if Harvey doesn't pan out. To be optimistic, both teams may have made the right move for their franchise.
    Your right they are different. They gave up more for a draft pick than we did for a Pro Bowl vet. We came out better IMO. They had a choice and they choose to address in the draft and we choose Allen. What makes it worse is that they gave up a lot to get Harvey.
    Two times in a row you ignored the entire post just to highlight the last sentence in an effort to prevent you from doing it again I have created a run on sentence so you are forced to respond to the entire thing so first of all I agree we came out better but that does not mean the Jags came out horrible this is not us vs. them as I said before second of all just as they are wondering will he be a bust or a stud we are wondering will he be a star or a drunk to Cajun I still have not seen the criticisn of the Allen trade which you refer to to Cojo that is a bit off topic don't you think?
    I don't know what the fuck you are talking about.


    Edit: IMHO we have less to worry about.
    the topic of this thread has nothing to do with us at, its about the jags, lets not make it about us

    [/quote]

    Your right. IMHO the Jags gave away too much for Harvey.
    [/quote]

    IMHO +1 lol
    [/quote]

    I'm glad we're back on track. I think the Jags don't have many holes, so giving up a lot was ok.
    "I hate when threads are destroyed by facts and logic."
    - Prophet


    Thanks Josdin!

  7. #27
    marstc09's Avatar
    marstc09 is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    Phoenix, Arizona
    Posts
    23,179

    Re: Was dealing for Derrick Harvey worth it for the Jags?

    "V" wrote:
    "dcboardr41" wrote:
    "marstc09" wrote:
    "dcboardr41" wrote:
    "marstc09" wrote:
    [quote author=V link=topic=45561.msg791146#msg791146 date=1213206254]
    [quote author=marstc09 link=topic=45561.msg790856#msg790856 date=1213133282]
    [quote author=V link=topic=45561.msg790654#msg790654 date=1213103330]
    [quote author=Mr-holland link=topic=45561.msg790353#msg790353 date=1213047934]
    They were really foolish but they could have been right.
    They are right when Harvey becomes the best DE in the game ( Allen is the best right now ) or if Allen goes drinking and driving again. Maybe they did not want to take the risk bringing in a guy who has/had a problem with that
    This is not Allen vs. Harvey in any way. This is two different scenarios of a team addressing their need. It just happens to be the same position, but its not like the teams were picking between the two.

    Before the Allen trade, we were saying lets get an OT and get a DE later in the draft. We knew Harvey was out of reach. Also, Allen never even visited Jacksonville. He wasn't even on their radar.

    So, I don't think they're foolish at all. Harvey doesn't have to become the best DE in the game for them to be right. Even if Allen blows it, the Jags are still wrong if Harvey doesn't pan out. To be optimistic, both teams may have made the right move for their franchise.
    Your right they are different. They gave up more for a draft pick than we did for a Pro Bowl vet. We came out better IMO. They had a choice and they choose to address in the draft and we choose Allen. What makes it worse is that they gave up a lot to get Harvey.
    Two times in a row you ignored the entire post just to highlight the last sentence in an effort to prevent you from doing it again I have created a run on sentence so you are forced to respond to the entire thing so first of all I agree we came out better but that does not mean the Jags came out horrible this is not us vs. them as I said before second of all just as they are wondering will he be a bust or a stud we are wondering will he be a star or a drunk to Cajun I still have not seen the criticisn of the Allen trade which you refer to to Cojo that is a bit off topic don't you think?
    I don't know what the fuck you are talking about.


    Edit: IMHO we have less to worry about.
    the topic of this thread has nothing to do with us at, its about the jags, lets not make it about us

    [/quote]

    Your right. IMHO the Jags gave away too much for Harvey.
    [/quote]

    IMHO +1 lol
    [/quote]

    I'm glad we're back on track. I think the Jags don't have many holes, so giving up a lot was ok.
    [/quote]

    Your probably right. They did draft Quentin Groves as well. Hurting for a DE indeed. What about Safety? I'm I correct, is Brian Williams starting at FS? Ouch.

  8. #28
    dcboardr41 is offline Team Alumni
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    3,051

    Re: Was dealing for Derrick Harvey worth it for the Jags?

    "marstc09" wrote:
    "V" wrote:
    "dcboardr41" wrote:
    "marstc09" wrote:
    "dcboardr41" wrote:
    [quote author=marstc09 link=topic=45561.msg791225#msg791225 date=1213216150]
    [quote author=V link=topic=45561.msg791146#msg791146 date=1213206254]
    [quote author=marstc09 link=topic=45561.msg790856#msg790856 date=1213133282]
    [quote author=V link=topic=45561.msg790654#msg790654 date=1213103330]
    [quote author=Mr-holland link=topic=45561.msg790353#msg790353 date=1213047934]
    They were really foolish but they could have been right.
    They are right when Harvey becomes the best DE in the game ( Allen is the best right now ) or if Allen goes drinking and driving again. Maybe they did not want to take the risk bringing in a guy who has/had a problem with that
    This is not Allen vs. Harvey in any way. This is two different scenarios of a team addressing their need. It just happens to be the same position, but its not like the teams were picking between the two.

    Before the Allen trade, we were saying lets get an OT and get a DE later in the draft. We knew Harvey was out of reach. Also, Allen never even visited Jacksonville. He wasn't even on their radar.

    So, I don't think they're foolish at all. Harvey doesn't have to become the best DE in the game for them to be right. Even if Allen blows it, the Jags are still wrong if Harvey doesn't pan out. To be optimistic, both teams may have made the right move for their franchise.
    Your right they are different. They gave up more for a draft pick than we did for a Pro Bowl vet. We came out better IMO. They had a choice and they choose to address in the draft and we choose Allen. What makes it worse is that they gave up a lot to get Harvey.
    Two times in a row you ignored the entire post just to highlight the last sentence in an effort to prevent you from doing it again I have created a run on sentence so you are forced to respond to the entire thing so first of all I agree we came out better but that does not mean the Jags came out horrible this is not us vs. them as I said before second of all just as they are wondering will he be a bust or a stud we are wondering will he be a star or a drunk to Cajun I still have not seen the criticisn of the Allen trade which you refer to to Cojo that is a bit off topic don't you think?
    I don't know what the fuck you are talking about.


    Edit: IMHO we have less to worry about.
    the topic of this thread has nothing to do with us at, its about the jags, lets not make it about us

    [/quote]

    Your right. IMHO the Jags gave away too much for Harvey.
    [/quote]

    IMHO +1 lol
    [/quote]

    I'm glad we're back on track. I think the Jags don't have many holes, so giving up a lot was ok.
    [/quote]

    Your probably right. They did draft Quentin Groves as well. Hurting for a DE indeed. What about Safety? I'm I correct, is Brian Williams starting at FS? Ouch.
    [/quote]

    they have reggie nelson at FS, i dunno who their SS is

    Pissing on the Pack since 08'

  9. #29
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    1,206

    Re: Was dealing for Derrick Harvey worth it for the Jags?

    Everyone seems to thinks the Jags gave up a lot to move up, but I strongly disagree.


    Take a look at the trade chart values for the picks (both the old and new chart values are provided):

    Team Pick # Old Pts. New Pts.
    BAL 8 1400 1505
    JAX 26 700 820
    JAX 71 235 235
    JAX 89 145 145
    JAX 125 47 47
    JAX Total 1127 1247

    As you can see, the Ravens gave up a bunch more points than the Jags.
    This is actually the largest points disparity over at least the past 3 years (probably longer) for pure draft pick trades.

    Obviously the question at the end of the day is did they pick good players with those picks.
    But in terms of what they gave up at the time and the NFL draft trade market, the Jags got a good deal.
    When the age of the Vikings came to a close, they must have sensed it. Probably, they gathered together one evening, slapped each other on the back and said, "Hey, good job." - Jack Handey [Deep Thoughts]

  10. #30
    marstc09's Avatar
    marstc09 is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    Phoenix, Arizona
    Posts
    23,179

    Re: Was dealing for Derrick Harvey worth it for the Jags?

    "dcboardr41" wrote:
    "marstc09" wrote:
    "V" wrote:
    "dcboardr41" wrote:
    "marstc09" wrote:
    [quote author=dcboardr41 link=topic=45561.msg791236#msg791236 date=1213217319]
    [quote author=marstc09 link=topic=45561.msg791225#msg791225 date=1213216150]
    [quote author=V link=topic=45561.msg791146#msg791146 date=1213206254]
    [quote author=marstc09 link=topic=45561.msg790856#msg790856 date=1213133282]
    [quote author=V link=topic=45561.msg790654#msg790654 date=1213103330]
    [quote author=Mr-holland link=topic=45561.msg790353#msg790353 date=1213047934]
    They were really foolish but they could have been right.
    They are right when Harvey becomes the best DE in the game ( Allen is the best right now ) or if Allen goes drinking and driving again. Maybe they did not want to take the risk bringing in a guy who has/had a problem with that
    This is not Allen vs. Harvey in any way. This is two different scenarios of a team addressing their need. It just happens to be the same position, but its not like the teams were picking between the two.

    Before the Allen trade, we were saying lets get an OT and get a DE later in the draft. We knew Harvey was out of reach. Also, Allen never even visited Jacksonville. He wasn't even on their radar.

    So, I don't think they're foolish at all. Harvey doesn't have to become the best DE in the game for them to be right. Even if Allen blows it, the Jags are still wrong if Harvey doesn't pan out. To be optimistic, both teams may have made the right move for their franchise.
    Your right they are different. They gave up more for a draft pick than we did for a Pro Bowl vet. We came out better IMO. They had a choice and they choose to address in the draft and we choose Allen. What makes it worse is that they gave up a lot to get Harvey.
    Two times in a row you ignored the entire post just to highlight the last sentence in an effort to prevent you from doing it again I have created a run on sentence so you are forced to respond to the entire thing so first of all I agree we came out better but that does not mean the Jags came out horrible this is not us vs. them as I said before second of all just as they are wondering will he be a bust or a stud we are wondering will he be a star or a drunk to Cajun I still have not seen the criticisn of the Allen trade which you refer to to Cojo that is a bit off topic don't you think?
    I don't know what the fuck you are talking about.


    Edit: IMHO we have less to worry about.
    the topic of this thread has nothing to do with us at, its about the jags, lets not make it about us

    [/quote]

    Your right. IMHO the Jags gave away too much for Harvey.
    [/quote]

    IMHO +1 lol
    [/quote]

    I'm glad we're back on track. I think the Jags don't have many holes, so giving up a lot was ok.
    [/quote]

    Your probably right. They did draft Quentin Groves as well. Hurting for a DE indeed. What about Safety? I'm I correct, is Brian Williams starting at FS? Ouch.
    [/quote]

    they have reggie nelson at FS, i dunno who their SS is
    [/quote]

    Are you sure?

    http://www.sportsline.com/nfl/teams/depth-chart/JAC

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 20
    Last Post: 08-15-2008, 08:31 AM
  2. Will the Jaguars have trouble signing first-round pick Derrick Harvey?
    By cajunvike in forum General NFL Discussion
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 07-31-2008, 04:14 PM
  3. Schrager STILL has Derrick Harvey at #17...to the Chiefs
    By cajunvike in forum General NFL Discussion
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 04-24-2008, 01:17 AM
  4. If our pick comes up at 17 and Matt Ryan and Derrick Harvey are long gone..
    By mewario in forum Vikings Offseason/Draft/FA Forum
    Replies: 71
    Last Post: 03-26-2008, 10:12 AM
  5. Do Vikings like Florida’s DE Derrick Harvey?
    By singersp in forum Vikings Offseason/Draft/FA Forum
    Replies: 47
    Last Post: 03-20-2008, 08:51 AM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •