Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 34
  1. #21
    jmcdon00's Avatar
    jmcdon00 is offline Jersey Retired Snake Champion, Moto Trial Fest 2: Mountain Pack Champion, LL City Truck 2 Champion, Arithmetic sequence Champion, Troops Tower Defense Champion
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    8,278

    Re: NFL.com calls T.Jack a loser

    "Perch56" wrote:
    it doesnt call him a loser, he just says he is unexperienced, and i do believe we did do somethings to help out TJ. first we wont have tired backs so he wont have all the pressure on him and we did get 2 pretty decent WRs in the draft and we did get bobby wade too.
    The heading below the picture of tom brady and tjack is winners and losers, implying brady as the winner and tjack the loser. Why is the Man always trying to bring the black man down. 8)

  2. #22
    laujesse is offline Starter
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    269

    Re: NFL.com calls T.Jack a loser

    "singersp" wrote:
    I agree with him to a point on the QB situation. I still believe they should start him though.

    My reasoning for them to have signed an older proven veteran is to have someone T-Jack & Bollinger can draw from & learn from while he's gaining playing experience. Also for someone to turn to if he struggles. I think having a proven older vet on the team is a key component for developing young & upcoming QB's.

    A coach can only teach so much. A veteran whose been there, done that & can point out things to the young QB will help immensly. I posted on article on that very subject a couple of weeks ago.

    Nowhere in that article did he call T-Jack a loser. He simply stating they will muddle along while T-Jack gains experience because he is cast into the starting role or go with unproven Brooks.
    I have to ask you what you are talking about.
    Brooks Bollinger has nfl starting experience...
    He is completely proven to be middle of the road. The definition of a life long back up and system QB, no, I dont concider that a bad thing.

    anyway.

    Vic has nothing on Tom Powers.
    Tom Powers < Hetero

  3. #23
    V-Unit's Avatar
    V-Unit is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    6,317

    Re: NFL.com calls T.Jack a loser

    "laujesse" wrote:
    "singersp" wrote:
    I agree with him to a point on the QB situation. I still believe they should start him though.

    My reasoning for them to have signed an older proven veteran is to have someone T-Jack & Bollinger can draw from & learn from while he's gaining playing experience. Also for someone to turn to if he struggles. I think having a proven older vet on the team is a key component for developing young & upcoming QB's.

    A coach can only teach so much. A veteran whose been there, done that & can point out things to the young QB will help immensly. I posted on article on that very subject a couple of weeks ago.

    Nowhere in that article did he call T-Jack a loser. He simply stating they will muddle along while T-Jack gains experience because he is cast into the starting role or go with unproven Brooks.
    I have to ask you what you are talking about.
    Brooks Bollinger has nfl starting experience...
    He is completely proven to be middle of the road. The definition of a life long back up and system QB, no, I dont concider that a bad thing.

    anyway.

    Vic has nothing on Tom Powers.
    Brooks Bollinger has been there, but he certainly has not done that, if anything. I'm assuming Singer is talking about someone with some big wins under his belt.
    "I hate when threads are destroyed by facts and logic."
    - Prophet


    Thanks Josdin!

  4. #24
    davike's Avatar
    davike is offline Team Alumni
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    2,750

    Re: NFL.com calls T.Jack a loser

    I agree with you Anderson.....Vic hates the Vikings....most of the media does.

    We have a ton of potential....not much proven talent at QB, WR, and DE position though. We as Vikings fans are optimistic but most of the other people don't see much at all and if I take off my purple shades then I might come to the same conclusion. I think we could be really good or really bad, depending upon what some key players do. I think that we have one of the most, if not the most, underrated group of WRs in the NFL. I am hoping that they turn out like our LBs last year. We have a few key players coming back from injury as well.

    I almost agree with him in the fact that we didn't help TJ much in the offseason. I like the players we signed, but we still don't know if they are going to do much, they haven't proven much for their previous teams.

    I think the best way I can describe the Vikings is that we have amazing potential, but not much proven talent. We haven't had one of the WRs step up, we aren't what Jackson is going to do this year, we haven't really seen what our current DEs can do if they are at their right positions and completely healthy. And we also have questions at other positions as well but I am not going go there.

    Thanks Josdin00 for the sig!

  5. #25
    Marrdro's Avatar
    Marrdro is offline Beware My Spreadsheet, Bitches!
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    43,909

    Re: NFL.com calls T.Jack a loser

    "davike" wrote:
    I agree with you Anderson.....Vic hates the Vikings....most of the media does.

    We have a ton of potential....not much proven talent at QB, WR, and DE position though. We as Vikings fans are optimistic but most of the other people don't see much at all and if I take off my purple shades then I might come to the same conclusion. I think we could be really good or really bad, depending upon what some key players do. I think that we have one of the most, if not the most, underrated group of WRs in the NFL. I am hoping that they turn out like our LBs last year. We have a few key players coming back from injury as well.

    I almost agree with him in the fact that we didn't help TJ much in the offseason. I like the players we signed, but we still don't know if they are going to do much, they haven't proven much for their previous teams.

    I think the best way I can describe the Vikings is that we have amazing potential, but not much proven talent. We haven't had one of the WRs step up, we aren't what Jackson is going to do this year, we haven't really seen what our current DEs can do if they are at their right positions and completely healthy. And we also have questions at other positions as well but I am not going go there.
    Ahhhhh.
    Another disciple of optimism
    Great post, however, what did I tell you about taking your purple glass off.
    Keep them on my friend......
    ;D


    Here is another quote from a man who has deep wisdom

    Vic has nothing on Tom Powers.
    Tom Powers is the Vikings Anti-Christ.
    Many many thanks to my talented friend Jos for the new Sig.http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v343/josdin00/Vikings/Marrdro_sig.jpg

  6. #26
    VikesFan787's Avatar
    VikesFan787 is offline Coordinator
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Erie, PA
    Posts
    888

    Re: NFL.com calls T.Jack a loser

    814


  7. #27
    VikesFan787's Avatar
    VikesFan787 is offline Coordinator
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Erie, PA
    Posts
    888

    Re: NFL.com calls T.Jack a loser

    814


  8. #28
    Billy Boy is offline Hall of Famer
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    1,426

    Re: NFL.com calls T.Jack a loser

    Im confused.
    So is T-Jack realy a loser?

    Maybe we need a "Is Tarvaris a loser" thread.
    The "Does Chilly Suck or Not" thread was a hit.


    All the kids my age pee their pants, it's the coolest.

  9. #29
    Marrdro's Avatar
    Marrdro is offline Beware My Spreadsheet, Bitches!
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    43,909

    Re: NFL.com calls T.Jack a loser

    "Billy" wrote:
    Im confused.
    So is T-Jack realy a loser?

    Maybe we need a "Is Tarvaris a loser" thread.
    The "Does Chilly Suck or Not" thread was a hit.
    Please don't......


    I would wear out at least two keyboards sticking up for the boy.


    Lets start one by say the 4th game.
    Then I will have ammunition (his outstanding stats) other than my honest opinion to throw at the naysayers who continually berate me with thier need for a "Proven"
    "Big Name" QB vice a young, untested QB with lots of potential that they can't see.
    Many many thanks to my talented friend Jos for the new Sig.http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v343/josdin00/Vikings/Marrdro_sig.jpg

  10. #30
    SharperImage's Avatar
    SharperImage is offline Hall of Famer
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    1,727

    Re: NFL.com calls T.Jack a loser

    "VikesFan787" wrote:
    lmao...nice 1 787

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. ANOTHER sore loser!
    By cajunvike in forum The Clubhouse
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 01-24-2007, 08:49 PM
  2. favre = loser!
    By vikes_4_life_42 in forum Trash the Pack
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 10-26-2006, 12:14 AM
  3. Hoffman...what a LOSER!!!
    By cajunvike in forum The Clubhouse
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 07-12-2006, 09:12 PM
  4. I told You This Guy Was a LOSER!
    By sleepagent in forum General NFL Discussion
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 03-31-2006, 01:46 AM
  5. Loser Bowl I
    By mrviking28 in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 10-17-2005, 03:47 PM

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
  •