Jeez Matt Cassel is Awful - Page 5 - Jets Insider.com Forums

Eckesg1 · 11-02-2012, 01:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ASG0531

3 is bigger than 1.

But 100% is bigger than 50%.

The Bills went to 4 SBs and lost them all. That's 0%. Is 4 better than 1 in that case?

SONNY WERBLIN · 11-02-2012, 01:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eckesg1

I disagree partly. AJ Smith has had fantastic talent on his teams and yet they have not even gone to a Super Bowl. And, the Jets of recent years seem to have the Chargers number. 2-0 under Rex Ryan against San Diego.

It was a comparison of the GM's ability to manage and compile a talented roster. The Jets success against SD has everything to do with coaching, not talent.

Switch coaches. How do you think Rex would have done with the Chargers against the Jets with Norv as HC.

palmetto defender · 11-02-2012, 01:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eckesg1

We've had 1 chance at winning the Super Bowl and won that one chance.

That's 100% success rate. Which is better?

I'll take NUMEROUS visits to the title even if there are some losses.
Next you'll be calling NY "Title Town"?
The Jets are a better franchise than the Packers, I'm sure you'll say.
Hey, the Canton Bulldogs have more titles than the Jets. LOL

Eckesg1 · 11-02-2012, 01:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SONNY WERBLIN

It was a comparison of the GM's ability to manage and compile a talented roster. The Jets success against SD has everything to do with coaching, not talent.

Switch coaches. How do you think Rex would have done with the Chargers against the Jets with Norv as HC.

Very true. So actually Mike has outdone AJ in picking a head coach AND knowing when to hold'em and fold'em.

But I agree partly, I think Tanny should go first.

Eckesg1 · 11-02-2012, 01:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by palmetto defender

I'll take NUMEROUS visits to the title even if there are some losses.
Next you'll be calling NY "Title Town"?
The Jets are a better franchise than the Packers, I'm sure you'll say.
Hey, the Canton Bulldogs have more titles than the Jets. LOL

Marv Levy says hi. So does Cris Collinsworth. Bud Grant is also here. And in a way, Andy Reid and Donovan McNabb are also here.

In fact in the NFL Top Ten Snakebitten franchises in the Eagles bit, Mike Florio says

"The Eagles are the best example of a situation where it is better to never even contend than to contend all the time get close and have your heart broken"

PatsFanTX · 11-02-2012, 01:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eckesg1

Marv Levy says hi. So does Cris Collinsworth. Bud Grant is also here. And in a way, Andy Reid and Donovan McNabb are also here.

Yep, winning conference chamionships means diddley squat.

ASG0531 · 11-02-2012, 02:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eckesg1

Marv Levy says hi. So does Cris Collinsworth. Bud Grant is also here. And in a way, Andy Reid and Donovan McNabb are also here.

In fact in the NFL Top Ten Snakebitten franchises in the Eagles bit, Mike Florio says

"The Eagles are the best example of a situation where it is better to never even contend than to contend all the time get close and have your heart broken"

If actually winning Super Bowls is the goal then:

3-for 6 is better than

(really 3-5, but I added 6 as a legit opportunity in 2006)

1-for-1 is better than

0-for-4

If you want to get literal, the Pats are 3-for-7 in the big game historically. Pats could have had 8-10 rings by now!

Eckesg1 · 11-02-2012, 02:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PatsFanTX

Yep, winning conference chamionships means diddley squat.

Again Mike Florio in the NFL Top Ten Snakebitten Franchises in the Eagles bit says AND I QUOTE,

"The Eagles are the best example of a situation where it is better to never even contend than to contend all the time get close and have your heart broken"

Here's the link, in case you want see it:

Eckesg1 · 11-02-2012, 02:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ASG0531

If actually winning Super Bowls is the goal then:

3-for 6 is better than

(really 3-5, but I added 6 as a legit opportunity in 2006)

1-for-1 is better than

0-for-4

Again, I'm not saying that the Patriots have had less success than us. What I'm saying is they have underachieved as a team close to 10 years.

ASG0531 · 11-02-2012, 02:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eckesg1

Again, I'm not saying that the Patriots have had less success than us. What I'm saying is they have underachieved as a team close to 10 years.

You are speaking to the choir with Pats fans... Brady should have 5 rings right now and Eli should be hated in New York.

Alas, history plays itself out.

PatsFanTX · 11-02-2012, 02:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eckesg1

What I'm saying is they have underachieved as a team close to 10 years.

You can't be serious?

Over the last 10 years Pats have won 8 AFCE titles.

Won 5 conference championships.

Won 3 Super Bowl titles, and if it weren't for 2 plays, they would have won 5 titles.

How the hell is that underachieving?

ASG0531 · 11-02-2012, 02:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PatsFanTX

You can't be serious?

Over the last 10 years Pats have won 8 AFCE titles.

Won 5 conference championships.

Won 3 Super Bowl titles, and if it weren't for 2 plays, they would have won 5 titles.

How the hell is that underachieving?

TX, refer to my post above. He's right, and you know it.

But this is basically the equivalent of C students making fun of the A student for getting a B+ on his test.

Eckesg1 · 11-02-2012, 02:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PatsFanTX

You can't be serious?

Over the last 10 years Pats have won 8 AFCE titles.

Won 5 conference championships.

Won 3 Super Bowl titles, and if it weren't for 2 plays, they would have won 5 titles.

How the hell is that underachieving?

Bill Simmons, one of your own people and I quote:

If you're scoring at home, the Giants stopped the Patriots from (A) finishing 19-0, (B) winning five Super Bowls, (C) being remembered for one the best football runs ever, (D) employing the most successful quarterback of all time, and (E) employing the most successful football coach of all time. They did this while flipping the New York/Boston rivalry back firmly in New York's favor and creating just a smidge of anti-Brady sentiment back home now (we'll get to this), putting the Brady/Belichick era in a fascinating place historically. Despite winning three Super Bowls, they somehow need a fourth or Patriots fans — the same people who rooted for football's Clippers for four solid decades and never in a million years thought the words "Patriots" and "dynasty" could ever appear in a sentence next to each other — will feel like the Brady/Belichick era never reached its full potential. The Giants made this happen. And to a lesser extent, so did the Jets — without them, Spygate never happens, and neither does that "You've never won anything since Spygate" crap, which technically isn't crap because it's true. I will not be visiting New York anytime soon.

8. A Brazilian Supermodel Helping Wes Welker to Avoid Scapegoat Status

Two things to remember about that "drop." First, it wouldn't have clinched the game. Eli would have gotten the ball back unless the Patriots finished the drive and scored. Second, it was a ****ty pass. That play happened right in front of me — I was sitting on that side of the field, dead-even with the 13-yard line, 16 rows up. My favorite part about attending football games: Seeing the receivers line up, then guessing the play call the same way you would while playing Madden. Sometimes, you can tell exactly what's about to happen — and that play was one of those times. They caught the Giants in the wrong defense; they had the ball on the right hash mark and Welker on the left side, with a ton of field to work with, so once he beat his guy off the line of scrimmage, you knew exactly where he was going. Brady knew it, too … only he put a little too much air on the ball.

Had Welker hauled that football in, the catch itself would have been on the level of Manningham's tremendous catch that kick-started the winning Giants drive. Does Welker usually make that play? Yes. Does Brady usually make that throw? Yes. They both blew it. Regardless, Gisele's performance before (the "Pray for Tom" e-mail that leaked out) and after (when she inexplicably talked to a reporter and ripped was overheard ripping Brady's receivers for so many drops), as well as everyone's affection for Welker (shades of Tim Wakefield after the Boone Game) should keep Welker from becoming a scapegoat.

Mrs. Brady? She might have a harder time shaking this one. I lived in the Boston area for the first 13 years of my life. I went to college 45 minutes from Boston. I spent the first 10 years after college living in Boston. It's hard to overstate how provincial Massachusetts is. There's an "Us Against Them" mentality that's just part of the DNA. You grow up there, you live a full life there, you die there. That's how it's supposed to play out. There's been a local undercurrent for the past few years that Brady thinks he's too good for Boston (because he moved to New York, then California), that he cares too much about being a celebrity, that Gisele made him soft, that he's not really "one of us." So when you combine Gisele's Super Bowl week performance with everything else, take a guess what they'll be talking about on local sports radio this month.

.

FF2® · 11-02-2012, 02:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eckesg1

Again, I'm not saying that the Patriots have had less success than us. What I'm saying is they have underachieved as a team close to 10 years.

So whats that say about what the Jets have done?

Eckesg1 · 11-02-2012, 02:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ASG0531

TX, refer to my post above. He's right, and you know it.

But this is basically the equivalent of C students making fun of the A student for getting a B+ on his test.

I would amend that to the "lauded A student" getting B+ on 8 papers in a row.

But the jist is still the same. But you come on here and mess with us? We're going to tell you facts.

Eckesg1 · 11-02-2012, 02:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FF2®

So whats that say about what the Jets have done?

Took advantage of their one SB opportunity and have gone into hibernation with a few rumblings.

The Patriots?

Were in hibernation with a few rumblings for 40 years, woke up and speared some SB victories before trying to stave off a slow incoming food coma.

How's that metaphor?

FF2® · 11-02-2012, 02:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by palmetto defender

I'll take NUMEROUS visits to the title even if there are some losses.

This is spoken like a true fan and a WINNER.

Any fan that doesn't WANT a SB appearance BECAUSE HIS TEAM MIGHT LOSE...has a LOSERS mentality.

Are people SO FRAGILE that they can't handle losing a football game?

WTF...Root for your team to go all the way. And if they dont? So ****ing what...enjoy the ride.

"ooooooooohhh I'd rather not go at all if they lose....wwwaaaahhhhh" GROW A SACK SALLIES!!!!

ASG0531 · 11-02-2012, 02:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eckesg1

I would amend that to the "lauded A student" getting B+ on 8 papers in a row.

But the jist is still the same. But you come on here and mess with us? We're going to tell you facts.

Maybe you and the rest of those rooting for the C students, as well as the team itself, should go back to studying?