Keep Texans Talk Google Ad Free!
Venmo Tip Jar | Paypal Tip Jar
Thanks for your support! 🍺😎👍

CJ Stroud year 2

Texansballer74 said:
No I’m not, go look at the game thread. I’m just not harping on it like you are doing. Why because I understand the condition and I understand it’s going to take some time. It’s going to take that entire unit to hopefully start clicking on all cylinders and moving in the right direction. You do know that right? Miscommunications throughout that entire line. Miscommunication between CJ and Woods. Coaching has to get better, play calling as well. You don’t have your rookie quarterback throwing that many times in his first game. Especially with that offensive line being put together pretty much on the fly because of injuries.
Click to expand...

There’s a huge difference between reasonable criticism, and unjustified nitpicking. I think by now, you’ve figured out who belongs in one of those two categories.

You’ll end up :brickwall: if you try to reason with the latter. You’re not going to change their mind. The bias is baked in.
 
FuzzyLogic said:
...But it is illogical to say doing well on the test doesn't predict success, but doing poorly does predict failure. Especially when you have a small sample size, and that sample size consists of a person, place, or thing, that typically has a low success rate like NFL QBs...
Click to expand...
No, not illogical if you consider that sucess may depend on more than pure athleticism. Setting aside the environment (team, coaching, etc) there are those athletically gifted players who do not succeed. Why?

One possible explanation is the mental aspect of the game - the ability to process and make correct decisions.

I believe everyone should be aware that athletically there are those who are "quick twitch" and.those who lack this quality. Generally speaking, quick twitch is better.

The way I see it, S2 is an attempt to measure the "twitchiness" of the mental process. If you have it but fall short athletically, you can fail. But if you don't have it, so far, indications are against you for sucess, no matter how athletically gifted you may be.

For QB's, the twitchiness of the mental aspect of the game appears to be dominant.

One thing is clear; Stroud will put this idea to the test.
 
Last edited:
I haven’t seen this much wailing and gnashing of teeth over a test since my girl peed on a strip in the girls bathroom in 12th grade.

I’m pretty sure at this point, I could write the S2, the P2 and the FU2.

parts of the above, may or may not be partially or totally fabricated. Refer to my new test, the WTH2.
 
Earl34 said:
I don't know how you came to that conclusion. I do know that if Stroud had 82 yards passing like Burrows or threw 2 INTs like Bryce Young or 3 INTs like Josh Allen, you would be posting about his stats.
Click to expand...
How many posts have I made over the yrs that quote stats? I leave that stuff to the nerds.
 
Marcus said:
There’s a huge difference between reasonable criticism, and unjustified nitpicking. I think by now, you’ve figured out who belongs in one of those two categories.

You’ll end up :brickwall: if you try to reason with the latter. You’re not going to change their mind. The bias is baked in.
Click to expand...

Care to tell me if I'm in the nitpicking group? I've really not commented on Stroud's performance up to this point, because as a rookie I expect him to struggle. Can he learn to speed up his processing and learn to deal with the NFL level pressure he will face on almost a weekly basis.
 
Number19 said:
No, not illogical if you consider that sucess may depend on more than pure athleticism. Setting aside the environment (team, coaching, etc) there are those athletically gifted players who do not succeed. Why?

One possible explanation is the mental aspect of the game - the ability to process and make correct decisions.

I believe everyone should be aware that athletically there are those who are "quick twitch" and.those who lack this quality. Generally speaking, quick twitch is better.

The way I see it, S2 is an attempt to measure the "twitchiness" of the mental process. If you have it but fall short athletically, you can fail. But if you don't have it, so far, indications are against you for sucess, no matter how athletically gifted you may be.

For QB's, the twitchiness of the mental aspect of the game appears to be dominate.

One thing is clear; Stroud will put this idea to the test.
Click to expand...

I'll go along with illogical may have been a poor word choice, but it doesn't negate the overall point that the test is useless at this point in time.

I already stated there have been 80 QBs taken from 2017 to the present - of those, and throwing out this year's draft for too small of sample size, there were 66 QBs taken from 2017-2022 and 15 have had any amount of success in the NFL so far, and I'm using the term success VERY loosely...

Kenny Pickett, Brock Purdy, Trevor Lawrence, Mac Jones, Joe Burrow, Tua Tagovailoa, Justin Herbert, Jalen Hurts, Kyler Murray, Daniel Jones, Gardner Minshew, Josh Allen, Lamar Jackson, Patrick Mahomes, Deshaun Watson

15 of 66 - a 23% 'success' rate

You could have put those 66 player photos on a wall and given me a blindfold and 66 darts and said me not hitting you with a dart didn't guarantee you would be successful, but if I did hit you with a dart it was a great predictor of your failure.

Was it because I have magical success predicting darts? Or just a high probability that since 77% weren't going to be successful anyway I had a greater chance of hitting them with a dart?

Again I'm not saying the S2 isn't a good test, I'm saying most QBs fail in the NFL, and there isn't enough data to tell if the test is a predictor of anything - yet.
 
Th
steelbtexan said:
He also brought his team from behind to win the NFCCG.
Click to expand...

they won in spite of Jimmy..not b/c of him. You pointing out the 1 time he showed up & did something of note to advance the 49ers cause is overshadowed by the many times he failed. 49ers dominated that SB for about 3.5 qtr & should’ve won it if not for your boy missing on a walk in TD that probably would’ve sealed it.
 
Mr teX said:
yeah conveniently the year he had the best defense in the league…a year he also “won” a playoff game throwing 8 damn times lol:
Click to expand...
LMAO. I've never seen a QB do so little to "win" a championship game. He went 6-8 for 77 yards and his team still scored 37 points. In the Super Bowl, Shanahan did everything possible to keep him from making the big mistake and he still threw 2 INTs. But, hey, all Jimmy G does is win. LMAO.
 
FuzzyLogic said:
I'll go along with illogical may have been a poor word choice, but it doesn't negate the overall point that the test is useless at this point in time.

I already stated there have been 80 QBs taken from 2017 to the present - of those, and throwing out this year's draft for too small of sample size, there were 66 QBs taken from 2017-2022 and 15 have had any amount of success in the NFL so far, and I'm using the term success VERY loosely...

Kenny Pickett, Brock Purdy, Trevor Lawrence, Mac Jones, Joe Burrow, Tua Tagovailoa, Justin Herbert, Jalen Hurts, Kyler Murray, Daniel Jones, Gardner Minshew, Josh Allen, Lamar Jackson, Patrick Mahomes, Deshaun Watson

15 of 66 - a 23% 'success' rate

You could have put those 66 player photos on a wall and given me a blindfold and 66 darts and said me not hitting you with a dart didn't guarantee you would be successful, but if I did hit you with a dart it was a great predictor of your failure.

Was it because I have magical success predicting darts? Or just a high probability that since 77% weren't going to be successful anyway I had a greater chance of hitting them with a dart?

Again I'm not saying the S2 isn't a good test, I'm saying most QBs fail in the NFL, and there isn't enough data to tell if the test is a predictor of anything - yet.
Click to expand...
If your claim is accurate, why would teams spend thousands of dollars for the results of the test? Bottom line, the test is being used.
 
Number19 said:
No, not illogical if you consider that sucess may depend on more than pure athleticism. Setting aside the environment (team, coaching, etc) there are those athletically gifted players who do not succeed. Why?

One possible explanation is the mental aspect of the game - the ability to process and make correct decisions.

I believe everyone should be aware that athletically there are those who are "quick twitch" and.those who lack this quality. Generally speaking, quick twitch is better.

The way I see it, S2 is an attempt to measure the "twitchiness" of the mental process. If you have it but fall short athletically, you can fail. But if you don't have it, so far, indications are against you for sucess, no matter how athletically gifted you may be.

For QB's, the twitchiness of the mental aspect of the game appears to be dominant.

One thing is clear; Stroud will put this idea to the test.
Click to expand...

I can go with you on this to a point. The problem with this thesis however is at what point is the cut off for the mental & physical “twitchiness” & How much improvement can be expected upon both b/c This is ultimately what it comes down to for scouts and teams when selecting a guy. You can be a genius on the S2, but if you can’t hit the broad side of a barn when you throw it, or you’re wind up/arm strength is trash, how much of that mental twitch are you willing to sacrifice to get a guy who can come in right away and get you wins immediately. These are pertinent questions for HC/GMs at the top of the draft.

So even if the S2 is a good test it still only takes into account a very small fraction of what it takes to be a successful qb.
 
Khelar said:
All I know is I said “hey he missed some throws that he will need to make in the future” and you had replied with excuses. Which is fine I agree with your excuses which is why im not making any conclusions about Stroud. But it’s a fact that there were several throws that were there, where he had the opportunity to make the throw, and that he missed. It’s fine, I’m not saying he’s a bust because he missed a few throws game 1, but it’s something to watch down the line
Click to expand...
I hear you brother, that’s why I said,” I’ll wait until week five just like I did Mills last season.

Now look at what he’s working with.

Third string Center who is a rookie
Right Guard who by far had the worse grade on that offensive line and probably the entire league.
A Right tackle who they just acquired on the last week of preseason. Mind you he looked terrible then and this past Sunday.
A newly acquired Left guard.
And a top notch Left tackle who will get penalize every game / drive killer .

They refuse to run the ball.

You see where I’m going with this.

That’s why I’m not tripping on a few bad passes right now
 
Mr teX said:
I can go with you on this to a point. The problem with this thesis however is at what point is the cut off for the mental & physical “twitchiness” & How much improvement can be expected upon both b/c This is ultimately what it comes down to for scouts and teams when selecting a guy. You can be a genius on the S2, but if you can’t hit the broad side of a barn when you throw it, or you’re wind up/arm strength is trash, how much of that mental twitch are you willing to sacrifice to get a guy who can come in right away and get you wins immediately. These are pertinent questions for HC/GMs at the top of the draft.

So even if the S2 is a good test it still only takes into account a very small fraction of what it takes to be a successful qb.
Click to expand...
I agree with every thing you stated, and I alluded to your comments. This point is very well presented.
 
Number19 said:
If your claim is accurate, why would teams spend thousands of dollars for the results of the test? Bottom line, the test is being used.
Click to expand...

Firstly, not every team is using it. Second, it’s a copycat league. Those who are using it are in search of some kind of edge.

look at baseball. The A’s made a mini run playing extreme moneyball went all in b/c they thought they had something and since that time that franchise has been an utter traiwreck.

other teams started going a little heavier with metrics but they’ve not seen anymore success than they had been having previously. Like I said even if it is valid, still it’s only a small part of the equation. The problem is at least 1 person in here is acting like it’s a large part, & I personally am not sure it’s even a valid piece to the puzzle. At least not in terms of determining a guys mental aptitude to play the position.
 
steelbtexan said:
Care to tell me if I'm in the nitpicking group? I've really not commented on Stroud's performance up to this point, because as a rookie I expect him to struggle. Can he learn to speed up his processing and learn to deal with the NFL level pressure he will face on almost a weekly basis.
Click to expand...

Yeah, your S2 fetish drives me nuts, and I don’t think you’re going to give the kid a chance to prove himself. I’m just calling it as I see it.
 
Corrosion said:
While the S2 isn't always right, it has yet to be wrong.

Scoring highly on it hasn't meant that player will be successful but those who have scored low have performed poorly without exception.
Click to expand...
But again that's a sample size and statistical issue more than a "this test is the holy grail" type issue. This test hasn't existed for very long, most QBs pass the S2 and few quarterbacks actually make it. Meaning the statistical probability of a failing quarterback to make it is super low because few fail and few make it in the NFL (whether they pass or fail the S2) which has nothing to do with the S2 itself and rather just raw probability.

You could make a test called the 20 yard pumpkin test and it's literally who can shotput a pumpkin 20 yards.

This test has existed for 5 years and tested 60 quarterbacks. 50 of them pass, 10 of them fail.

Then lets say across those 5 years 3 quarterbacks of all tested actually made it as NFL QBs.

All you need is to have none of those 3 QBs who made it be in the group who fail the pumpkin test and your odds of that are incredibly high because few fail. If that happens you can make the exact same claim as the S2 and say that those who fail don't make it.
 
Number19 said:
If your claim is accurate, why would teams spend thousands of dollars for the results of the test? Bottom line, the test is being used.
Click to expand...
There's a lot of tests and A LOT of statistical databases and models that get used by NFL teams.

The use of them by teams does not validate them one way or the other.

Teams used the wonderlic for ages and that didn't validate it as a good test.

As has been pointed out by myself and by Fuzzylogic this S2 test literally doesn't have enough data at this point to give validity to the claims made by several in this thread. That doesn't make it good or bad, but there's just simply not enough data yet. 7 years of data, even if they did test every single QB which they didn't is still unfortunately not enough data.
 
Number19 said:
If your claim is accurate, why would teams spend thousands of dollars for the results of the test? Bottom line, the test is being used.
Click to expand...

To try and gain an advantage, the same as they would purchase or use any other metric or tool. That in and of itself doesn't make the test sound.

Just as many teams don't use the test, does that make it useless?

Again not sure how many times I can state I'm not saying the test is useless or wrong, I'm saying it hasn't been used enough to have any accuracy outside of blind chance. Time and a larger sample size will tell.
 
Mr teX said:
Th


they won in spite of Jimmy..not b/c of him. You pointing out the 1 time he showed up & did something of note to advance the 49ers cause is overshadowed by the many times he failed. 49ers dominated that SB for about 3.5 qtr & should’ve won it if not for your boy missing on a walk in TD that probably would’ve sealed it.
Click to expand...

Or the defense had made a stop.

BTW, did you notice Jimmy G won again Sunday with a much less talented Raiders team. Say what you want about Jimmy G but look at his record. He's a winner. Some struggle with this fact.
 
Marcus said:
Yeah, your S2 fetish drives me nuts, and I don’t think you’re going to give the kid a chance to prove himself. I’m just calling it as I see it.
Click to expand...
Believe what you want.

But notice I haven't commented on his play this preseason/Season unlike many on this MB. Mainly because all this season is about is getting Stroud experience. With a solid Jimmy G type QB this team could win 10 games against this schedule. They wont because of a rookie QB and to a certain extent rookie HC/Rookie OC.
 
Sweech said:
There's a lot of tests and A LOT of statistical databases and models that get used by NFL teams.

The use of them by teams does not validate them one way or the other.

Teams used the wonderlic for ages and that didn't validate it as a good test.

As has been pointed out by myself and by Fuzzylogic this S2 test literally doesn't have enough data at this point to give validity to the claims made by several in this thread. That doesn't make it good or bad, but there's just simply not enough data yet. 7 years of data, even if they did test every single QB which they didn't is still unfortunately not enough data.
Click to expand...
These tests do not need any validation beyond a team's decision to use it.
 
Number19 said:
These tests do not need any validation beyond a team's decision to use it.
Click to expand...
Quoted for truth.

They only sell the test to a certain number of teams and they always hit their goals. So teams must believe there's something to the test or they wouldn't buy the test. This is a fact.
 
Sweech said:
There's a lot of tests and A LOT of statistical databases and models that get used by NFL teams.

The use of them by teams does not validate them one way or the other.

Teams used the wonderlic for ages and that didn't validate it as a good test.

As has been pointed out by myself and by Fuzzylogic this S2 test literally doesn't have enough data at this point to give validity to the claims made by several in this thread. That doesn't make it good or bad, but there's just simply not enough data yet. 7 years of data, even if they did test every single QB which they didn't is still unfortunately not enough data.
Click to expand...
How much data do you need for YOU to validate the test? 10 yrs? 20 yrs? 50 Yrs?

Teams obviously disagree with your post.
 
steelbtexan said:
Quoted for truth.

They only sell the test to a certain number of teams and they always hit their goals. So teams must believe there's something to the test or they wouldn't buy the test. This is a fact.
Click to expand...
But not all the teams believe
 
JB said:
But not all the teams believe
Click to expand...
They dont try to sell the test to all teams. They sell only to a couple of teams in each division. Exclusivity is a big selling point.

Example: If the Texans wanted to use the test they wouldn't sell it to them, because the Colts and I think the Titans have already purchased the rights to the test.
 
Number19 said:
These tests do not need any validation beyond a team's decision to use it.
Click to expand...
But you're implying with your earlier comments and one where you quoted fuzzylogic who explained that at this point in time there's not enough data that the test is valid because teams use it.

It's an appeal to authority and one that doesn't counteract the current argument of a lack of data.
steelbtexan said:
How much data do you need for YOU to validate the test? 10 yrs? 20 yrs? 50 Yrs?

Teams obviously disagree with your post.
Click to expand...
Not sure how many years exactly because years isn't itself the inherent issue with the data. The issue is there is a lack of it. There's a small amount of QBs who make it every year so being able to apply test data against opportunity is difficult. It's arguably the hardest position to measure against because opportunity is so limited. I've also illustrated the exact issues in and of themselves in earlier posts.

Simply put they need more QBs taking the test and they need more QBs to make the league to give credence to it's values. However long that takes is up to the football gods.

Again as fuzzylogic has said and I myself will say I have nothing against the test itself. Maybe it could be a good barometer for success, maybe it isn't. The fact is there's not enough information at this current point to say one way or another. I'd disagree with you saying the test is great just the same as I'd disagree with someone who says it isn't simply because no one has the data to say definitively one way or the other.

I've also illustrated my qualms with the logic of failure of the test equals failure to succeed. If you'd like to disagree with any of the points I made I'm all ears.

That said I also do not accept, "teams use it therefore it's good" as a valid argument. I don't follow logical fallacies like appeals to authority. Like I said teams use a lot of data models and statistic models, the use of them doesn't validate them in anyway nor does it suggest that them paying for the service actually means they use the service. What I mean by that is many teams use PFF, does that mean they simply sign or draft PFFs highest rated players? No. It's simply another resource to use with whatever weight they feel is necessary. Likewise it's altogether possible and altogether likely that a team that subscribes to the S2 test still would have drafted CJ Stroud.

Furthermore teams don't "disagree" with my post because they use the service. They can subscribe to the service with full knowledge of it's limitations that I highlighted. I'm not even saying teams shouldn't use it I'm simply highlighting that the current data set is limited meaning its current application is limited. Anyone employed by these teams who has any background in math/statistics would agree with this, whether or not they use the service.
 
steelbtexan said:
They dont try to sell the test to all teams. They sell only to a couple of teams in each division. Exclusivity is a big selling point.

Example: If the Texans wanted to use the test they wouldn't sell it to them, because the Colts and I think the Titans have already purchased the rights to the test.
Click to expand...
Prove it!
 
steelbtexan said:
They dont try to sell the test to all teams. They sell only to a couple of teams in each division. Exclusivity is a big selling point.

Example: If the Texans wanted to use the test they wouldn't sell it to them, because the Colts and I think the Titans have already purchased the rights to the test.
Click to expand...
This seems like a crock of ... to me. Goes against the leagues trying to force parity.
 
steelbtexan said:
Or the defense had made a stop.

BTW, did you notice Jimmy G won again Sunday with a much less talented Raiders team. Say what you want about Jimmy G but look at his record. He's a winner. Some struggle with this fact.
Click to expand...

I’ve heard the same “he just wins” argument for all of the following qbs over the years:

VY
Matt Lienart
Johnny Manziel
Tim Tebow
Guess how many of these guys went on to do ANYTHING in the league or were even a factor in whatever little success their respective teams did have in the league.

winning games in the nfl isn’t a qb stat unless you truly are the head of the snake & Jimmy G was definitely NOT that for the 49ers that year. And ok, he won A game this past weekend..his team scored what 19 pts, playing against a trash bronco team? Is that really what you’re touting bro?
 
Mr teX said:
I’ve heard the same “he just wins” argument for all of the following qbs over the years:

VY
Matt Lienart
Johnny Manziel
Tim Tebow
Guess how many of these guys went on to do ANYTHING in the league or were even a factor in whatever little success their respective teams did have in the league.

winning games in the nfl isn’t a qb stat unless you truly are the head of the snake & Jimmy G was definitely NOT that for the 49ers that year. And ok, he won A game this past weekend..his team scored what 19 pts, playing against a trash bronco team? Is that really what you’re touting bro?
Click to expand...
17 points. 200 yards 2 touchdowns and 1 interceptions.
 
I actually like Jimmy G. I think he's somewhat limited in the offenses he can run, but the ones he can he does it quite well.

That said I'd never want him. Waaaaaay too injury prone. I wouldn't want injury prone players to begin with but ESPECIALLY at QB where so much of your team's success is tied to them not to mention they always carry the team's largest cap hit (so long as they're good).
 
Mr teX said:
I’ve heard the same “he just wins” argument for all of the following qbs over the years:

VY
Matt Lienart
Johnny Manziel
Tim Tebow
Guess how many of these guys went on to do ANYTHING in the league or were even a factor in whatever little success their respective teams did have in the league.

winning games in the nfl isn’t a qb stat unless you truly are the head of the snake & Jimmy G was definitely NOT that for the 49ers that year. And ok, he won A game this past weekend..his team scored what 19 pts, playing against a trash bronco team? Is that really what you’re touting bro?
Click to expand...
His record speaks for itself.

McDaniels said as much last Sunday.

That was a game they lost last yr with Carr at QB.
 
steelbtexan said:
They dont try to sell the test to all teams. They sell only to a couple of teams in each division. Exclusivity is a big selling point.

Example: If the Texans wanted to use the test they wouldn't sell it to them, because the Colts and I think the Titans have already purchased the rights to the test.
Click to expand...

lol, this is utter nonsense b/c for 1….If I read or remember correctly in an article, IT WAS EXCLUSIVELY DEVELOPED FOR PREDICTING THE PROBABILITY OF SUCCESS FOR FOOTBALL PLAYERS…BUT REALLY, ONLY QBS ARE ASKED TO TAKE THEM BY TEAMS

only 1 profession a I know who has those.

so why in the hell would you “limit” your profit pool lol…especially if you are already have the cash cow that is the NFL on the hook?

I think it’s more likely not every team is buying what they’re trying to sell….which is an auto-scout for picking QBs.
 
Sweech said:
I actually like Jimmy G. I think he's somewhat limited in the offenses he can run, but the ones he can he does it quite well.

That said I'd never want him. Waaaaaay too injury prone. I wouldn't want injury prone players to begin with but ESPECIALLY at QB where so much of your team's success is tied to them not to mention they always carry the team's largest cap hit (so long as they're good).
Click to expand...

Totally agree with this. I wonder how long it will be before he gets hurt again this yr?
 
steelbtexan said:
His record speaks for itself.

McDaniels said as much last Sunday.

That was a game they lost last yr with Carr at QB.
Click to expand...

it’s not “his record” it’s the 49ers record. That same team has been in the NFCCG 2 years running..once with him and once without and are favored AGAIN this year to get to the SB.

So Jimmy ain’t got **** to do with that teams’ success over the last 3-4 years bro. They’ve been built to win. He was just along for the ride.
 
Texansballer74 said:
Who all scored low on this test besides CJ? And can you provide how their careers are going so far?

And name all the teams that use it.
Click to expand...
Why? Toward what end? More to the point, why should this information be made public?

As members of a discussion forum, we simply peruse the information available and come to our own independent conclusions.
 
Texansballer74 said:
17 points. 200 yards 2 touchdowns and 1 interceptions.
Click to expand...

17 pts…right at the Texans avg PPG last year. Someone inform the NFL Davis Mills was cheated out of a lot of wins last year b/c that shoulda been enough for him to win a lot of games according to Steelb.
 
Just out of curiosity I would like to see how a bunch of hardcore video gamers would score. Here is a quote from this SI article.

"The 40 to 45 minute test, which is run through a gaming laptop, measures the players ability to rapidly disseminate information that appears on the screen in front of them."

I suspect that the more video games you have played the better you are with processing things on a gaming laptop. I probably owe my son an apology. All those years when I told him to quit playing video games & get off his ass & go outside I didn't realize he was preparing himself for the S2 test.
 
Mr teX said:
I’ve heard the same “he just wins” argument for all of the following qbs over the years:

VY
Matt Lienart
Johnny Manziel
Tim Tebow
Guess how many of these guys went on to do ANYTHING in the league or were even a factor in whatever little success their respective teams did have in the league.

winning games in the nfl isn’t a qb stat unless you truly are the head of the snake & Jimmy G was definitely NOT that for the 49ers that year. And ok, he won A game this past weekend..his team scored what 19 pts, playing against a trash bronco team? Is that really what you’re touting bro?
Click to expand...
Raiders beat the Broncos by one point (17-16). Jimmy G is a winner. I'm still trying to figure out how Jimmy G made the Broncos' kicker miss the 3rd quarter FG that was the difference in the score.
 
mws said:
Just out of curiosity I would like to see how a bunch of hardcore video gamers would score. Here is a quote from this SI article.

"The 40 to 45 minute test, which is run through a gaming laptop, measures the players ability to rapidly disseminate information that appears on the screen in front of them."

I suspect that the more video games you have played the better you are with processing things on a gaming laptop. I probably owe my son an apology. All those years when I told him to quit playing video games & get off his ass & go outside I didn't realize he was preparing himself for the S2 test.
Click to expand...

preparing himself to be an NFL qb!
 
Mr teX said:
it’s not “his record” it’s the 49ers record. That same team has been in the NFCCG 2 years running..once with him and once without and are favored AGAIN this year to get to the SB.

So Jimmy ain’t got **** to do with that teams’ success over the last 3-4 years bro. They’ve been built to win. He was just along for the ride.
Click to expand...
The 49ers record was much better with Jimmy G than with Lance/Mullins/Beathard etc....

BTW, Not that this is everything but PFF had Jimmy G rated as the 3rd best QB in week 1.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top