Page 11 of 85 FirstFirst ... 9101112132161 ... LastLast
Results 101 to 110 of 847
  1. #101
    ejmat is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    8,849

    Re:Tarvaris Jackson speaks....

    bsmithberkley wrote:
    Caine wrote:
    bsmithberkley wrote:
    ejmat wrote:
    V4L wrote:
    ^^^

    See that's exactly what I told you was going to happen

    You put out examples of current QBs who had ups and downs in the league and turned out good.. You put out examples of more well known QBs who had ups and downs and that means you are comparing them or feel Jackson will be that good.. I got your point though.. You really never know what you will get.. Could put out other shitty QBs from that past and have ups and downs.. We just personally feel he could still be good and like his progress

    This is why I never argue anymore.. Anytime you state you still feel Jackson will be good you are called a crotch sniffer and an idiot for feeling we shouldn't give up on him

    Only thing i'll add in is.. Bevell and Chilly seemed to play very vanilla.. Maybe it was due to lack of talent.. But last year we opened it up.. When Jackson comes in we will see if these 2 first time OC and HC are learning or if it was due to fact we had a shitty line and shitty WRs and TEs who couldn't catch

    We now have Sidney healthy and breaking out.. Shank becoming a top TE.. Percy wrecking people in the slot.. And no more Ryan cook and Artis Hicks starting

    (No I am not making excuses.. Just feel this team is leaps and bounds from what it was and I feel the coaches are improving and meshing together, so we will see how Jackson does given his shot)
    Good post my friend. Not everyone has to agree about TJ. Some here actually like him even if they are a basher at this point. The problem I have with BS post is he compares these QBs that actually showed they were decent calibur QBs even though they may have struggled. He also leaves out a lot of facts such as why the QBs didn't flourish till their 3, 4 or later years. Such as how much did they play? How good was the talent around them? Were they already playing behind another QB?

    See, these are questions that would have a causal effect of why someone perceives what they do. BS throws out years they are in the league before they flourish in HIS opinion. But he fails to leave out some of the main reasons why. Such as Troy Aikman. He started doing pretty well in MY opinion in his sencond year. That was with a lot of young players. Young played with the Bucs initially then backed up Joe Montana. Why did it take him 9 years to flourish? Maybe because he backed up Montana all that time? Culpepper didn't do well till his 2nd year according to BS. Well, was that because he didn't play at all his first year? Matt Hasselback? Did he not play behind Favre for a couple of years before he had his chance?

    Those are the areas that have a great effect on why QBs don't flourish right away. The point is comparing TJ to any of these QBs right now is somewhat ridiculous. I'm not saying he shouldn't have faith in TJ. Hell, I do too. But for Christ Sake if someone is going to throw comparisons out there throw in the entire picture.
    For the record, not once did I compare TJ to those guys. I referenced that Quarterbacks who eventually became successful often started slow. Some started and sucked for years, some started and got benched, and some never got the chance to start until later.

    Nor am I trying to "Mislead" anyone with my "UNOFFICIAL STATS" ...

    Seriously, what is up with all the allergic reactions to someone doing a little research to ground his opinion around here? You would think I spat in someone's face the way people react to "unofficial stats" around here.

    "Let's beat him up for doing a little research and sharing it with us...that Ba$tard,who does he think he is anyway!!!" mentality is very confusing.


    You are making an "argumentative reach" by intimating that I have compared TJ to those guys.

    My point is still very simple, we shouldn't be writing him off because "he has had plenty of time to prove himself already". Enough good QBs have had troubled beginnings to show that is possible for TJ as well.
    Please, allow me to fill in the blanks. ejmat is pointing out - for the second time - that the list of QB's you are using isn't really indicative of QB's in similar situations. I'll illustrate what he means by that:

    Boomer Esiason came in behind Ken Anderson – The Bengal Bomber – and split time for his first couple seasons. His almost immediate success ruins any comparison with Jackson.

    Drew Bledsoe – Essentially started right away for a Patriots team that was nowhere near as powerful as they are today. In fact, they were 2-14 in ’92, and improved to 5-11 in ’93, Bledsoe’s rookie year. That indicates that Bledsoe was more a victim of poor team play, rather than being the reason for the poor team play.

    Culpepper…please, let’s not argue that he was a great QB. He was made by Randy Moss, and once Moss was traded, Culpepper hit the toilet and never returned.

    John Elway – in 1982, the Bronco’s were 2-7 (Strike shortened season). Elway came in as a Rookie in ’83, replacing Steve DeBerg partway through, and the team went 9-7.

    Jeff Garcia - Despite taking over for a injured Steve Young, the team Jeff inherited was NOT the Superbowl powerhouse team of Montana and Young. It was, instead, a team which was hemorrhaging talent due to salary cap hell that was the result of the financial maneuverings of Carmine Policy – who had bolted to head up the revived Cleveland Browns. The Mayor of San Francisco was quoted stating that Garcia was terrible, and shouldn’t be allowed to start for the 49’ers, and Garcia was soon ousted…

    Donovan McNabb – Drafted to the boo’s of Philly fans, Donovan didn’t even start until the end of his rookie season – well after it was obvious that Philly was going nowhere. In his second season, and his first as the starter, McNabb threw for over 300 yards, had 21 TDs and 13 INTs….he was well on his way.

    Randall Cunningham – Playing behind Ron “Jaws” Jaworski, Randall saw on again – off again action until his 3rd season when he took over for Philadelphia. He was hurt in ’91, ’93, and ’95 and finally left Philly and the NFL. In ’97, Minnesota called him out of retirement, and he was able to give them 1 almost complete season.

    Joe Montana – Acquired in 1979, Montana didn’t take over from Steve DeBerg until 1981. He went on to lead the 49’ers through their most dominant period, until he was traded to KC in 1993.


    Those are the first 8 QB's you listed. Those are the situations they fell into. In almost EVERY case, the season YOU cite as the year they came on was ALSO the year they ACTUALLY started being the starter. Jackson, meanwhile, was the designated starter for TWO SOLID YEARS and produced crappy numbers.

    In essence, there is very little in common between the QB's you listed and Tarvaris Jackson. I could continue with blurbs for the rest of your list, but I'm relatively certain that - as ejmat has already pointed out - there is a common theme that THEY all share...when finally given a legitimate opportunity to start, they succeeded. Jackson, unfortunately, didn't.

    Caine
    Again, a lot of work to discredit anything that says TJ has a shot... and what would we be talking about if TJ didn't get to start until the end of 2008. It would be that "we have a good QB waiting in the wings".

    You guys are trying to create a "black and white" view of a "gray" situation.

    Simple fact is, plenty of QBs wound up emerging later in theie careers for various reasons.
    You just don't seem to get it. Again, I will say that no one here is saying TJ doesn't have a chance to be successful. You must have some sort of paranoia to believe people are just ganging up on you just to do so. What it is you write these long posts and put up numbers as if it is the tell all instead of putting the other factors in there. Until you come up with unbiased, total story facts I (and many others on this site) will continue to call you out for it.

    No one has to go through a lot of work to discredit you. It's pretty darn simple. You do it to yourself. If anyone is trying to create a "black and white" view it would be you. Aren't we the ones that are pointing out variables? Isn't it you trying to use a small portion of the story to say something could happen?

    Even if TJ has a chance to be successful there are no similarities between that and what you are trying to spew.

  2. #102
    Purple Floyd's Avatar
    Purple Floyd is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    16,646
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re:Tarvaris Jackson speaks....

    ejmat wrote:
    V4L wrote:
    ^^^

    See that's exactly what I told you was going to happen

    You put out examples of current QBs who had ups and downs in the league and turned out good.. You put out examples of more well known QBs who had ups and downs and that means you are comparing them or feel Jackson will be that good.. I got your point though.. You really never know what you will get.. Could put out other shitty QBs from that past and have ups and downs.. We just personally feel he could still be good and like his progress

    This is why I never argue anymore.. Anytime you state you still feel Jackson will be good you are called a crotch sniffer and an idiot for feeling we shouldn't give up on him

    Only thing i'll add in is.. Bevell and Chilly seemed to play very vanilla.. Maybe it was due to lack of talent.. But last year we opened it up.. When Jackson comes in we will see if these 2 first time OC and HC are learning or if it was due to fact we had a shitty line and shitty WRs and TEs who couldn't catch

    We now have Sidney healthy and breaking out.. Shank becoming a top TE.. Percy wrecking people in the slot.. And no more Ryan cook and Artis Hicks starting

    (No I am not making excuses.. Just feel this team is leaps and bounds from what it was and I feel the coaches are improving and meshing together, so we will see how Jackson does given his shot)
    Good post my friend. Not everyone has to agree about TJ. Some here actually like him even if they are a basher at this point. The problem I have with BS post is he compares these QBs that actually showed they were decent calibur QBs even though they may have struggled. He also leaves out a lot of facts such as why the QBs didn't flourish till their 3, 4 or later years. Such as how much did they play? How good was the talent around them? Were they already playing behind another QB?

    See, these are questions that would have a causal effect of why someone perceives what they do. BS throws out years they are in the league before they flourish in HIS opinion. But he fails to leave out some of the main reasons why. Such as Troy Aikman. He started doing pretty well in MY opinion in his sencond year. That was with a lot of young players. Young played with the Bucs initially then backed up Joe Montana. Why did it take him 9 years to flourish? Maybe because he backed up Montana all that time? Culpepper didn't do well till his 2nd year according to BS. Well, was that because he didn't play at all his first year? Matt Hasselback? Did he not play behind Favre for a couple of years before he had his chance?

    Those are the areas that have a great effect on why QBs don't flourish right away. The point is comparing TJ to any of these QBs right now is somewhat ridiculous. I'm not saying he shouldn't have faith in TJ. Hell, I do too. But for Christ Sake if someone is going to throw comparisons out there throw in the entire picture.
    Exactly EJ.

    Personally I have said for years that it isn't so much that I have a problem with TJ but that I have a problem with him in this offensive scheme. If you go to BSB's list and pull out one of his examples you will see that Dan Fouts struggled for some years both because of a bad defense but also because he was in a scheme that didn't fit his skill set. Once Gibbs and later Coryell got there they put in an offense that he was suited for and from then on he was a different player. In that respect I do see Jackson in a similar light. Not that I feel he is capable of 40000 yards, but that in a more vertical offense with less complexity I feel he would be able to perform at a higher level. And yes, if Steve Young had gone to the raiders and their chuck the ball deep offense he probably would not have been as successful as he was in SF.

    So what I am saying is that development of a particular QB is often less important than being put into a system that lends itself to taking advantage of your strengths and not asking you to do things that don't come naturally. In Jacksons case he is athletic but maybe not the most cerebral QB in the league so a system that relies on him dropping back and having only 2 or so reads probably out of the shotgun similar to what the Steelers do IMO would be good for Jackson and put him in a situation where he has a chance. But in this offense where he has to take short drops, scan the field quickly and hit those short timing routes in the gaps ins't my idea of the best thing for him.

  3. #103
    ejmat is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    8,849

    Re:Tarvaris Jackson speaks....

    V4L wrote:
    I agree with that.. The facts are kind of bland

    When you dig deeper there are more areas that should be addressed like you pointed out

    Hell we could make up a list of QBs that were up and down and ended up shitty

    Glad we can both see both ways
    As always V4L.

    This guy has made a habit of putting up posts like this. He writes long posts in which he does put some effort into with his research. However, he has the habit of "adjusting" or not putting in other vital areas that would diminish his thought. In other words, he adjusts stats in ways to make himself look correct. He did it in the Ray Edwards thread as well. His stats here are merely his opinion on when QBs started to flourish and there is no basis behind why it's the case.

    People will agree and disagree about his opinion of TJ. I'll be the first to say I do have hope for him. However, it is BS methodology of coming to that conclusion I have a problem with. It is right up there with VikingTW and CMacD. This is why people are calling him out. Not merely because of his opinion.

  4. #104
    Purple Floyd's Avatar
    Purple Floyd is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    16,646
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re:Tarvaris Jackson speaks....

    bsmithberkley wrote:
    Caine wrote:
    bsmithberkley wrote:
    ejmat wrote:
    V4L wrote:
    ^^^

    See that's exactly what I told you was going to happen

    You put out examples of current QBs who had ups and downs in the league and turned out good.. You put out examples of more well known QBs who had ups and downs and that means you are comparing them or feel Jackson will be that good.. I got your point though.. You really never know what you will get.. Could put out other shitty QBs from that past and have ups and downs.. We just personally feel he could still be good and like his progress

    This is why I never argue anymore.. Anytime you state you still feel Jackson will be good you are called a crotch sniffer and an idiot for feeling we shouldn't give up on him

    Only thing i'll add in is.. Bevell and Chilly seemed to play very vanilla.. Maybe it was due to lack of talent.. But last year we opened it up.. When Jackson comes in we will see if these 2 first time OC and HC are learning or if it was due to fact we had a shitty line and shitty WRs and TEs who couldn't catch

    We now have Sidney healthy and breaking out.. Shank becoming a top TE.. Percy wrecking people in the slot.. And no more Ryan cook and Artis Hicks starting

    (No I am not making excuses.. Just feel this team is leaps and bounds from what it was and I feel the coaches are improving and meshing together, so we will see how Jackson does given his shot)
    Good post my friend. Not everyone has to agree about TJ. Some here actually like him even if they are a basher at this point. The problem I have with BS post is he compares these QBs that actually showed they were decent calibur QBs even though they may have struggled. He also leaves out a lot of facts such as why the QBs didn't flourish till their 3, 4 or later years. Such as how much did they play? How good was the talent around them? Were they already playing behind another QB?

    See, these are questions that would have a causal effect of why someone perceives what they do. BS throws out years they are in the league before they flourish in HIS opinion. But he fails to leave out some of the main reasons why. Such as Troy Aikman. He started doing pretty well in MY opinion in his sencond year. That was with a lot of young players. Young played with the Bucs initially then backed up Joe Montana. Why did it take him 9 years to flourish? Maybe because he backed up Montana all that time? Culpepper didn't do well till his 2nd year according to BS. Well, was that because he didn't play at all his first year? Matt Hasselback? Did he not play behind Favre for a couple of years before he had his chance?

    Those are the areas that have a great effect on why QBs don't flourish right away. The point is comparing TJ to any of these QBs right now is somewhat ridiculous. I'm not saying he shouldn't have faith in TJ. Hell, I do too. But for Christ Sake if someone is going to throw comparisons out there throw in the entire picture.
    For the record, not once did I compare TJ to those guys. I referenced that Quarterbacks who eventually became successful often started slow. Some started and sucked for years, some started and got benched, and some never got the chance to start until later.

    Nor am I trying to "Mislead" anyone with my "UNOFFICIAL STATS" ...

    Seriously, what is up with all the allergic reactions to someone doing a little research to ground his opinion around here? You would think I spat in someone's face the way people react to "unofficial stats" around here.

    "Let's beat him up for doing a little research and sharing it with us...that Ba$tard,who does he think he is anyway!!!" mentality is very confusing.


    You are making an "argumentative reach" by intimating that I have compared TJ to those guys.

    My point is still very simple, we shouldn't be writing him off because "he has had plenty of time to prove himself already". Enough good QBs have had troubled beginnings to show that is possible for TJ as well.
    Please, allow me to fill in the blanks. ejmat is pointing out - for the second time - that the list of QB's you are using isn't really indicative of QB's in similar situations. I'll illustrate what he means by that:

    Boomer Esiason came in behind Ken Anderson – The Bengal Bomber – and split time for his first couple seasons. His almost immediate success ruins any comparison with Jackson.

    Drew Bledsoe – Essentially started right away for a Patriots team that was nowhere near as powerful as they are today. In fact, they were 2-14 in ’92, and improved to 5-11 in ’93, Bledsoe’s rookie year. That indicates that Bledsoe was more a victim of poor team play, rather than being the reason for the poor team play.

    Culpepper…please, let’s not argue that he was a great QB. He was made by Randy Moss, and once Moss was traded, Culpepper hit the toilet and never returned.

    John Elway – in 1982, the Bronco’s were 2-7 (Strike shortened season). Elway came in as a Rookie in ’83, replacing Steve DeBerg partway through, and the team went 9-7.

    Jeff Garcia - Despite taking over for a injured Steve Young, the team Jeff inherited was NOT the Superbowl powerhouse team of Montana and Young. It was, instead, a team which was hemorrhaging talent due to salary cap hell that was the result of the financial maneuverings of Carmine Policy – who had bolted to head up the revived Cleveland Browns. The Mayor of San Francisco was quoted stating that Garcia was terrible, and shouldn’t be allowed to start for the 49’ers, and Garcia was soon ousted…

    Donovan McNabb – Drafted to the boo’s of Philly fans, Donovan didn’t even start until the end of his rookie season – well after it was obvious that Philly was going nowhere. In his second season, and his first as the starter, McNabb threw for over 300 yards, had 21 TDs and 13 INTs….he was well on his way.

    Randall Cunningham – Playing behind Ron “Jaws” Jaworski, Randall saw on again – off again action until his 3rd season when he took over for Philadelphia. He was hurt in ’91, ’93, and ’95 and finally left Philly and the NFL. In ’97, Minnesota called him out of retirement, and he was able to give them 1 almost complete season.

    Joe Montana – Acquired in 1979, Montana didn’t take over from Steve DeBerg until 1981. He went on to lead the 49’ers through their most dominant period, until he was traded to KC in 1993.


    Those are the first 8 QB's you listed. Those are the situations they fell into. In almost EVERY case, the season YOU cite as the year they came on was ALSO the year they ACTUALLY started being the starter. Jackson, meanwhile, was the designated starter for TWO SOLID YEARS and produced crappy numbers.

    In essence, there is very little in common between the QB's you listed and Tarvaris Jackson. I could continue with blurbs for the rest of your list, but I'm relatively certain that - as ejmat has already pointed out - there is a common theme that THEY all share...when finally given a legitimate opportunity to start, they succeeded. Jackson, unfortunately, didn't.

    Caine
    Again, a lot of work to discredit anything that says TJ has a shot... and what would we be talking about if TJ didn't get to start until the end of 2008. It would be that "we have a good QB waiting in the wings".

    You guys are trying to create a "black and white" view of a "gray" situation.

    Simple fact is, plenty of QBs wound up emerging later in theie careers for various reasons.
    Wrong.

    We are discrediting the notion that you can look at HOF QBs with totally different situations and then use that as a basis for giving Jackson half a decade on a contending team to finally pan out.

    Yes, Bradshaw was benched in 1974 but you forgot to mention he injured his shoulder that year which made it difficult to throw the ball. You also failed to mention that it was only for a short time and then he came back in to lead the team to a SB victory over my favorite team and that it was his TD passes that sealed the deal both in the conference title game against the Raiders and also in the SB. He wasn't just along for the ride, he was driving the bus. oh- and he called his own plays throughout his career. That might have a bit more of a learning curve that getting plays off the bench and not having the confidence from the coach to even change them. But I guess that doesn't matter.

  5. #105
    bsmithberkley is offline Pro-Bowler
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    333

    Re:Tarvaris Jackson speaks....

    ejmat wrote:
    V4L wrote:
    I agree with that.. The facts are kind of bland

    When you dig deeper there are more areas that should be addressed like you pointed out

    Hell we could make up a list of QBs that were up and down and ended up shitty

    Glad we can both see both ways
    As always V4L.

    This guy has made a habit of putting up posts like this. He writes long posts in which he does put some effort into with his research. However, he has the habit of "adjusting" or not putting in other vital areas that would diminish his thought. In other words, he adjusts stats in ways to make himself look correct. He did it in the Ray Edwards thread as well. His stats here are merely his opinion on when QBs started to flourish and there is no basis behind why it's the case.

    People will agree and disagree about his opinion of TJ. I'll be the first to say I do have hope for him. However, it is BS methodology of coming to that conclusion I have a problem with. It is right up there with VikingTW and CMacD. This is why people are calling him out. Not merely because of his opinion.
    My methodology said that a lot of good QBs bloomed late for various reasons. "Nit picking" that viewpoint does not change its veracity.

    It only shows how much you will nit pick a point you don't agree with.

    Just like the Edwards thread, you nitpicked the "unofficicial stats" but when presented with points regarding rush technique to compliment run stopping no one touched it with a ten foot pole. As well as the feedback I brought to the thread from Brian Robison.

    You conveniently ignore solid points that defer from your opinion and knock those that you think you can.

    You are "nit picking" small points that could just as easily be refuted by someone else with the same predisposition as yourself.

    Again, no thanks, I don't come here to play that game.
    None

  6. #106
    ejmat is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    8,849

    Re:Tarvaris Jackson speaks....

    bsmithberkley wrote:
    ejmat wrote:
    V4L wrote:
    I agree with that.. The facts are kind of bland

    When you dig deeper there are more areas that should be addressed like you pointed out

    Hell we could make up a list of QBs that were up and down and ended up shitty

    Glad we can both see both ways
    As always V4L.

    This guy has made a habit of putting up posts like this. He writes long posts in which he does put some effort into with his research. However, he has the habit of "adjusting" or not putting in other vital areas that would diminish his thought. In other words, he adjusts stats in ways to make himself look correct. He did it in the Ray Edwards thread as well. His stats here are merely his opinion on when QBs started to flourish and there is no basis behind why it's the case.

    People will agree and disagree about his opinion of TJ. I'll be the first to say I do have hope for him. However, it is BS methodology of coming to that conclusion I have a problem with. It is right up there with VikingTW and CMacD. This is why people are calling him out. Not merely because of his opinion.
    My methodology said that a lot of good QBs bloomed late for various reasons. "Nit picking" that viewpoint does not change its veracity.

    It only shows how much you will nit pick a point you don't agree with.

    Just like the Edwards thread, you nitpicked the "unofficicial stats" but when presented with points regarding rush technique to compliment run stopping no one touched it with a ten foot pole. As well as the feedback I brought to the thread from Brian Robison.

    You conveniently ignore solid points that defer from your opinion and knock those that you think you can.

    You are "nit picking" small points that could just as easily be refuted by someone else with the same predisposition as yourself.

    Again, no thanks, I don't come here to play that game.
    My methodology said that a lot of good QBs bloomed late for various reasons. "Nit picking" that viewpoint does not change its veracity.

    It only shows how much you will nit pick a point you don't agree with.
    Nitpick? Fist off if you read what I said I do agree that TJ does show promise. What I am disagreeing with is your spew that means absolutely nothing in regard to your point of view.
    Just like the Edwards thread, you nitpicked the "unofficicial stats" but when presented with points regarding rush technique to compliment run stopping no one touched it with a ten foot pole. As well as the feedback I brought to the thread from Brian Robison.
    What didn't I touch? Maybe the fact that I agreed with your point on the rushing technique and therefore there was no need to say anything about it. The "unofficial stats" I did say something about was because of the fact you self admitted to "adjusting" and they were stats just like these where there were causal affects to those stats. I'm not sure how many times I have to explain myself for the same thing. Maybe one day you will get that.
    You conveniently ignore solid points that defer from your opinion and knock those that you think you can.
    Show me one solid point that I have conveniently ignored. As a matter of fact you are the one that ignores the fact that there are causal affects surrounding the spew you are trying to prove.
    Again, no thanks, I don't come here to play that game
    No one is asking you to play any games. What we are asking you to do is quit adjusting your stats and ignoring causal affects of your thoughts to make points. It comes across as unsubstantiated and you lose credibility because of it. How come you are the only one that believes your points are valid the way you present them? Why don't you think about that before you try and get defensive?

  7. #107
    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
    8,279

    Re:Tarvaris Jackson speaks....

    ejmat wrote:
    bsmithberkley wrote:
    ejmat wrote:
    V4L wrote:
    I agree with that.. The facts are kind of bland

    When you dig deeper there are more areas that should be addressed like you pointed out

    Hell we could make up a list of QBs that were up and down and ended up shitty

    Glad we can both see both ways
    As always V4L.

    This guy has made a habit of putting up posts like this. He writes long posts in which he does put some effort into with his research. However, he has the habit of "adjusting" or not putting in other vital areas that would diminish his thought. In other words, he adjusts stats in ways to make himself look correct. He did it in the Ray Edwards thread as well. His stats here are merely his opinion on when QBs started to flourish and there is no basis behind why it's the case.

    People will agree and disagree about his opinion of TJ. I'll be the first to say I do have hope for him. However, it is BS methodology of coming to that conclusion I have a problem with. It is right up there with VikingTW and CMacD. This is why people are calling him out. Not merely because of his opinion.
    My methodology said that a lot of good QBs bloomed late for various reasons. "Nit picking" that viewpoint does not change its veracity.

    It only shows how much you will nit pick a point you don't agree with.

    Just like the Edwards thread, you nitpicked the "unofficicial stats" but when presented with points regarding rush technique to compliment run stopping no one touched it with a ten foot pole. As well as the feedback I brought to the thread from Brian Robison.

    You conveniently ignore solid points that defer from your opinion and knock those that you think you can.

    You are "nit picking" small points that could just as easily be refuted by someone else with the same predisposition as yourself.

    Again, no thanks, I don't come here to play that game.
    My methodology said that a lot of good QBs bloomed late for various reasons. "Nit picking" that viewpoint does not change its veracity.

    It only shows how much you will nit pick a point you don't agree with.
    Nitpick? Fist off if you read what I said I do agree that TJ does show promise. What I am disagreeing with is your spew that means absolutely nothing in regard to your point of view.
    Just like the Edwards thread, you nitpicked the "unofficicial stats" but when presented with points regarding rush technique to compliment run stopping no one touched it with a ten foot pole. As well as the feedback I brought to the thread from Brian Robison.
    What didn't I touch? Maybe the fact that I agreed with your point on the rushing technique and therefore there was no need to say anything about it. The "unofficial stats" I did say something about was because of the fact you self admitted to "adjusting" and they were stats just like these where there were causal affects to those stats. I'm not sure how many times I have to explain myself for the same thing. Maybe one day you will get that.
    You conveniently ignore solid points that defer from your opinion and knock those that you think you can.
    Show me one solid point that I have conveniently ignored. As a matter of fact you are the one that ignores the fact that there are causal affects surrounding the spew you are trying to prove.
    Again, no thanks, I don't come here to play that game
    No one is asking you to play any games. What we are asking you to do is quit adjusting your stats and ignoring causal affects of your thoughts to make points. It comes across as unsubstantiated and you lose credibility because of it. How come you are the only one that believes your points are valid the way you present them? Why don't you think about that before you try and get defensive?
    I believe his points are valid. As you just pointed out when you agree with someone there is no reason to chime in.
    Agree or disagree with his opinion, but atleast he is stating them in a non hostile way, which is more than you can claim.

  8. #108
    ejmat is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    8,849

    Re:Tarvaris Jackson speaks....

    jmcdon00 wrote:
    ejmat wrote:
    bsmithberkley wrote:
    ejmat wrote:
    V4L wrote:
    I agree with that.. The facts are kind of bland

    When you dig deeper there are more areas that should be addressed like you pointed out

    Hell we could make up a list of QBs that were up and down and ended up shitty

    Glad we can both see both ways
    As always V4L.

    This guy has made a habit of putting up posts like this. He writes long posts in which he does put some effort into with his research. However, he has the habit of "adjusting" or not putting in other vital areas that would diminish his thought. In other words, he adjusts stats in ways to make himself look correct. He did it in the Ray Edwards thread as well. His stats here are merely his opinion on when QBs started to flourish and there is no basis behind why it's the case.

    People will agree and disagree about his opinion of TJ. I'll be the first to say I do have hope for him. However, it is BS methodology of coming to that conclusion I have a problem with. It is right up there with VikingTW and CMacD. This is why people are calling him out. Not merely because of his opinion.
    My methodology said that a lot of good QBs bloomed late for various reasons. "Nit picking" that viewpoint does not change its veracity.

    It only shows how much you will nit pick a point you don't agree with.

    Just like the Edwards thread, you nitpicked the "unofficicial stats" but when presented with points regarding rush technique to compliment run stopping no one touched it with a ten foot pole. As well as the feedback I brought to the thread from Brian Robison.

    You conveniently ignore solid points that defer from your opinion and knock those that you think you can.

    You are "nit picking" small points that could just as easily be refuted by someone else with the same predisposition as yourself.

    Again, no thanks, I don't come here to play that game.
    My methodology said that a lot of good QBs bloomed late for various reasons. "Nit picking" that viewpoint does not change its veracity.

    It only shows how much you will nit pick a point you don't agree with.
    Nitpick? Fist off if you read what I said I do agree that TJ does show promise. What I am disagreeing with is your spew that means absolutely nothing in regard to your point of view.
    Just like the Edwards thread, you nitpicked the "unofficicial stats" but when presented with points regarding rush technique to compliment run stopping no one touched it with a ten foot pole. As well as the feedback I brought to the thread from Brian Robison.
    What didn't I touch? Maybe the fact that I agreed with your point on the rushing technique and therefore there was no need to say anything about it. The "unofficial stats" I did say something about was because of the fact you self admitted to "adjusting" and they were stats just like these where there were causal affects to those stats. I'm not sure how many times I have to explain myself for the same thing. Maybe one day you will get that.
    You conveniently ignore solid points that defer from your opinion and knock those that you think you can.
    Show me one solid point that I have conveniently ignored. As a matter of fact you are the one that ignores the fact that there are causal affects surrounding the spew you are trying to prove.
    Again, no thanks, I don't come here to play that game
    No one is asking you to play any games. What we are asking you to do is quit adjusting your stats and ignoring causal affects of your thoughts to make points. It comes across as unsubstantiated and you lose credibility because of it. How come you are the only one that believes your points are valid the way you present them? Why don't you think about that before you try and get defensive?
    I believe his points are valid. As you just pointed out when you agree with someone there is no reason to chime in.
    Agree or disagree with his opinion, but atleast he is stating them in a non hostile way, which is more than you can claim.
    So you agree his points regarding the years QBs took to flourish in the league are valid without the rest of the story? Seriously? Calling someone out for spewing BS is hostile?

    Agreeing about the conclusion of a point of view is different than agreeing about the way someone comes to that conclusion.

    I can agree that TJ shows some promise. However, I don't agree with BS throwing out QBs names with his own opinion on how long it took or should take a QB to mature in the league proves anything. Especially when there are other factors in the equation.

    I suggest you look back to the first post where I did "chime in". I think you will find I wasn't hostile. I didn't get hostile until he came at me with his defensive hostility. So I will admit to becoming hostile however if you are saying he didn't become hostile I will disagree with you.

    I will thank you for your input though and will definitely keep an eye about how I come off. In this case however, I believe you looked at the later portion of the thread to come to your determination.

  9. #109
    ejmat is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    8,849

    Re:Tarvaris Jackson speaks....

    I just went back. I first chimed in at the top of page 7. You will find I didn't attack BS at all. In fact I responded to someone elses post that replied to BS post. He, however, responded to me with a hostile post. So, if you go back and read that maybe you will understand how it all came to be.

  10. #110
    Caine's Avatar
    Caine is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    5,139

    Re:Tarvaris Jackson speaks....

    jmcdon00 wrote:
    ejmat wrote:
    bsmithberkley wrote:
    ejmat wrote:
    V4L wrote:
    I agree with that.. The facts are kind of bland

    When you dig deeper there are more areas that should be addressed like you pointed out

    Hell we could make up a list of QBs that were up and down and ended up shitty

    Glad we can both see both ways
    As always V4L.

    This guy has made a habit of putting up posts like this. He writes long posts in which he does put some effort into with his research. However, he has the habit of "adjusting" or not putting in other vital areas that would diminish his thought. In other words, he adjusts stats in ways to make himself look correct. He did it in the Ray Edwards thread as well. His stats here are merely his opinion on when QBs started to flourish and there is no basis behind why it's the case.

    People will agree and disagree about his opinion of TJ. I'll be the first to say I do have hope for him. However, it is BS methodology of coming to that conclusion I have a problem with. It is right up there with VikingTW and CMacD. This is why people are calling him out. Not merely because of his opinion.
    My methodology said that a lot of good QBs bloomed late for various reasons. "Nit picking" that viewpoint does not change its veracity.

    It only shows how much you will nit pick a point you don't agree with.

    Just like the Edwards thread, you nitpicked the "unofficicial stats" but when presented with points regarding rush technique to compliment run stopping no one touched it with a ten foot pole. As well as the feedback I brought to the thread from Brian Robison.

    You conveniently ignore solid points that defer from your opinion and knock those that you think you can.

    You are "nit picking" small points that could just as easily be refuted by someone else with the same predisposition as yourself.

    Again, no thanks, I don't come here to play that game.
    My methodology said that a lot of good QBs bloomed late for various reasons. "Nit picking" that viewpoint does not change its veracity.

    It only shows how much you will nit pick a point you don't agree with.
    Nitpick? Fist off if you read what I said I do agree that TJ does show promise. What I am disagreeing with is your spew that means absolutely nothing in regard to your point of view.
    Just like the Edwards thread, you nitpicked the "unofficicial stats" but when presented with points regarding rush technique to compliment run stopping no one touched it with a ten foot pole. As well as the feedback I brought to the thread from Brian Robison.
    What didn't I touch? Maybe the fact that I agreed with your point on the rushing technique and therefore there was no need to say anything about it. The "unofficial stats" I did say something about was because of the fact you self admitted to "adjusting" and they were stats just like these where there were causal affects to those stats. I'm not sure how many times I have to explain myself for the same thing. Maybe one day you will get that.
    You conveniently ignore solid points that defer from your opinion and knock those that you think you can.
    Show me one solid point that I have conveniently ignored. As a matter of fact you are the one that ignores the fact that there are causal affects surrounding the spew you are trying to prove.
    Again, no thanks, I don't come here to play that game
    No one is asking you to play any games. What we are asking you to do is quit adjusting your stats and ignoring causal affects of your thoughts to make points. It comes across as unsubstantiated and you lose credibility because of it. How come you are the only one that believes your points are valid the way you present them? Why don't you think about that before you try and get defensive?
    I believe his points are valid. As you just pointed out when you agree with someone there is no reason to chime in.
    Agree or disagree with his opinion, but atleast he is stating them in a non hostile way, which is more than you can claim.
    His points are valid if left supported by the out-of-context information he presented - however, with jut a small amount of digging, his list turns out to be completely opposed to what he's trying to use it to prove.

    When he says that those QB's "took that long" to develop, he completely discounts the fact that most of them were sitting behind another QB that entire time...and that when the QB's on his list finally got the opportunity to start, they came out fast and furious.

    Something Jackson hasn't done.

    In almost every case BSmith listed, those players exhibited dominant play almost immediately. But BSmith tried to make it look like they were "developing" during their early phase just like Jackson - when they were actually sitting behind another Starting QB. Jackson has been on the field - and when those he listed got on the field, they showed almost immediately that they belonged there...something Jackson has struggled to do.

    So, no, his points aren't really valid because he can't support them with anything not taken out of context. And so long as he continues to try and pass off half-assed stats or out-of-context notions as PROOF, he will be called on it.

    As for this:

    BSmith said:

    Just like the Edwards thread, you nitpicked the "unofficicial stats" but when presented with points regarding rush technique to compliment run stopping no one touched it with a ten foot pole. As well as the feedback I brought to the thread from Brian Robison.
    I believe I was very thorough while I explained how NOTHING Robison said even REMOTELY supported anything you said. I also believe we covered the rush technique issue by pointing out double-teaming tendencies, linebacker/safety/CB coverage help, and so on. In short, no one has backed away from anything you've said - you've simply ignored all of the times that your comments were completely refuted.

    Caine

Page 11 of 85 FirstFirst ... 9101112132161 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Tarvaris Jackson: "It should have been us"
    By Tad7 in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 73
    Last Post: 04-08-2010, 09:32 AM
  2. Tarvaris Jackson - QB Or Not QB
    By singersp in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 217
    Last Post: 03-17-2008, 10:20 AM
  3. Tarvaris Jackson
    By VIKINAT0R in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 62
    Last Post: 10-25-2007, 10:19 PM
  4. TARVARIS JACKSON
    By DustinDupont in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 10-30-2006, 10:43 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
  •