Thread: Start eating crow boys!

"audioghost" wrote:

"Acumen" wrote:

There has never been a person on this site that I've seen that has not wanted to see Tarvaris Jackson play.
The disagreement has always been when he should play.
He's in, everyone is happy, it is time for another piece of the puzzle to come together.

LOL WHATEVER! Every time i say anything about Jackson playing there's 4 or 5 old-timers (including you) that come on and say 'thats a bad idea, he wont be any better than johnson. fact is, johnson gives us the best chance to win...blah blah blah"

All I got to say is EAT IT...Jackson came in and gave us a shot to win...woulda been nice to have that all season!

Go ahead and find the post.
I guarantee that what I said was I said I would listent to coaches that have over 100 yrs of professional coaching experience over a fan that thinks he knows better, 100% of the time.
I still stand 100% behind that comment.
He is in, it wasn't some 12 yr olds decision.
I am happy.
If you're going to call me out then come up with a specific example that is in context.
I am happy he is in.

"LuckyVike" wrote:

"Acumen" wrote:

There has never been a person on this site that I've seen that has not wanted to see Tarvaris Jackson play.
The disagreement has always been when he should play.
He's in, everyone is happy, it is time for another piece of the puzzle to come together.

Yea, but are you going to set there and tell me there wasn't plenty of people on this trying to degrade the people saying Jackson should've been starting 5 or so weeks ago?
Many said Jackson wouldn't be seeing the field this season and they didn't think a rookie could get anything done this season.

There's the problem.
Some people have a tough time understanding the context of the posts.
I already responded to Audio's context.
If you group me as a BJ lover and a TJ hater you are 100% wrong and I guarantee in the 10K + posts you can't find one that says that.
Guaranteed.
I have been consistent in my statements.

Now is not a time to fight with each other. It is a time to celebrate.

Think of this as a Christmas miracle. Viking style. Our savior has found home. This is the man that will lead our team in whichever direction for the next couple years, and hopefully longer.

Now all we need to do is hope that Childress actually has enough brain cells to start the man.

Not saying is going to be the best QB in the leauge, but it's so nice to have someone on that team be a playmaker and drive the ball.

BC has been a real let down this year.
Everyone in minnesota wanted #7 to come in at the half but what does BC do?
Wastes the entire 3rd quarter and finally gives into the boos.
Get a clue, BJ was sucking the life from the dome & he was the last person to notice.
He has built a good foundation for the future but he needs to get over himself &do whats best for the state of minnesota football.

"audioghost" wrote:

"Acumen" wrote:

There has never been a person on this site that I've seen that has not wanted to see Tarvaris Jackson play.
The disagreement has always been when he should play.
He's in, everyone is happy, it is time for another piece of the puzzle to come together.

LOL WHATEVER! Every time i say anything about Jackson playing there's 4 or 5 old-timers (including you) that come on and say 'thats a bad idea, he wont be any better than johnson. fact is, johnson gives us the best chance to win...blah blah blah"

All I got to say is EAT IT...Jackson came in and gave us a shot to win...woulda been nice to have that all season!

Jackson was not ready even at the half way point.....he did have an injury this season.

I agree Brad should have sat sooner but Bollinger also got injuried

Looking forward to seeing Tjack get the reps in practise and taking it to the pack ;D

Also, if T-Jack doesn't start from here on out I will be calling for the head of Childress.
Personally I fear he still has no clue & will start BJ next week, sometimes it seem like this coaching staff isnt even watching the games.

TJ looked so good and so poised on the field... he mad great read and picked apart a defense that knew we were gunna do nothing but pass.
He did force that one ball for a pick, but that was just a heck of a play by the DB and he had to take a shot with the amount of time left.


* I am going to the game next week in PACKER LAND.
I said I had to make it to see Lambeau once while Farve was still ALIVE... but I can not wait now because even though we should not even be thinking playoffs we are still in it.
But I am looking more forward to a changin of the guard for both teams with JACKSON'S FIRST START, and Possibly FARVE'S LAST HOME GAME.

ROOKIE: show the pack what they have to look forward to from you and the future of Vikings football baby!

T-jack played against the soft zone the rest of the game, it wasn't hard to hit the open receiver.
I'm more interested in seeing him play next week (if Childress willing)

Let the revolution begin.

More impressively WIlliamson was catching almost everything thrown at him!
One more thing to be positive about!

"Acumen" wrote:

"audioghost" wrote:

"Acumen" wrote:

There has never been a person on this site that I've seen that has not wanted to see Tarvaris Jackson play.
The disagreement has always been when he should play.
He's in, everyone is happy, it is time for another piece of the puzzle to come together.

LOL WHATEVER! Every time i say anything about Jackson playing there's 4 or 5 old-timers (including you) that come on and say 'thats a bad idea, he wont be any better than johnson. fact is, johnson gives us the best chance to win...blah blah blah"

All I got to say is EAT IT...Jackson came in and gave us a shot to win...woulda been nice to have that all season!

Go ahead and find the post.
I guarantee that what I said was I said I would listent to coaches that have over 100 yrs of professional coaching experience over a fan that thinks he knows better, 100% of the time.
I still stand 100% behind that comment.
He is in, it wasn't some 12 yr olds decision.
I am happy.
If you're going to call me out then come up with a specific example that is in context.
I am happy he is in.

Go ahead and quote me as well, Audioghost.
I'm sure you won't have much difficulty in finding posts where I stated that Tarvaris wasn't ready...just look for anything written 2 weeks ago or sooner.

And, I stand by what I said.
Had Brad Johnson played the way he did versus Detroit....well....he actually did.
Better still, had our running game been able to move the ball effectively, we MIGHT have had a fighting chance.
Had our Defense been able to stop just ONE drive prior to the end of the 3rd quarter, we wouldn't have watched the Jets run away with the game and abandoned the run.

So, Tarvaris gets put in when the game is ALMOST out of reach...and I was glad to see it happen because Brad Johnson DOES suck.
But, Jackson's TD pass was ALL Mewelde Moore.
Anyone who says otherwise is watching the game via stat-tracker.
Jackson's INT was forgivable, but he didn't need to make THAT throw.

I figure that he'll play out the season - while we're not mathematically eliminated, emotionally we are with Brad Johnson at QB.

But, I stand by everything I posted previously.
If Travaris starts versus Green Bay, he will finally be facing a team that has prepared for him.
By the time we face St. Louis, there will be some reliable game tape on him as well.
Sure, he motivated the offense (too bad he couldn't motivate Williamson to hang on to a couple of passes), but ANYONE put in at that point would have.
We could have put Rosenthal in at QB and the team would have fired up.

So, if you want to act like a pecker with all this "Eat it" BS, you'd probably be better served to go back and READ the posts defending the idea of NOT starting Tarvaris at the time you and the others started calling for him.
Then, if you want to play, feel free to site specific examples of where we were wrong in our assessments at the time they were made.


Keep in mind, also, that if you use the "I told you so" proof method, the standard counter to that is to point out that no one knows what MIGHT have happened had Tarvaris started.
He may have won...but he may have been destroyed as well.
So, stick to proofs that apply at the time the statements were made...and be specific.

I await your response, sir.

Caine

"Acumen" wrote:

"audioghost" wrote:

"Acumen" wrote:

There has never been a person on this site that I've seen that has not wanted to see Tarvaris Jackson play.
The disagreement has always been when he should play.
He's in, everyone is happy, it is time for another piece of the puzzle to come together.

LOL WHATEVER! Every time i say anything about Jackson playing there's 4 or 5 old-timers (including you) that come on and say 'thats a bad idea, he wont be any better than johnson. fact is, johnson gives us the best chance to win...blah blah blah"

All I got to say is EAT IT...Jackson came in and gave us a shot to win...woulda been nice to have that all season!

Go ahead and find the post.
I guarantee that what I said was I said I would listent to coaches that have over 100 yrs of professional coaching experience over a fan that thinks he knows better, 100% of the time.
I still stand 100% behind that comment.
He is in, it wasn't some 12 yr olds decision.
I am happy.
If you're going to call me out then come up with a specific example that is in context.
I am happy he is in.

And thats exactly what you said, thus supporting Brad Johnson....

You trust Childress who plays Johnson...

WE WANTED T-JACK....who actually MADE PLAYS