Byron or Carr

[Jagsbch]

Quote:
Crushing opponents is hardly the Patsies trait, that is why I am hardpressed to consider them a dynasty.


i can't believe everyone missed this gem...

all i can say is...

WOW

i mean it's actually easier to put on teal glasses and see the jimmy is better than AJ *cough*LOLOLOLlDlOTLOLOL*cough* right now in jags homer vision than try and see any part of this perspective. note to Jagsbch: WINNING is WINNING. not only is this what the patriots have done to solidify themselves as a dynasty, in the era of free agency mind you, but it's also what the jaguars have lacked doing against the texans in our short history. also, "playing down" to a team is not a trait asscociated with excellence, in fact it's far worse than not having enough talent to win. "playing down" to a team means you have the upper hand/advantage

Bill Musgrave is not with the team for a reason, His inanability to utilize the talent of the offense ans well as attack teams weakness' rather than stregnths cost him his Job. One more thing you have to consider about last season is that the Jags were not going to break the tradition of being in the SB so their home town could loose out on the 50 Million another teams fan base could bring into town~!! Texans came in and scored 21 unanswered points at Alltel... Think about it, this was a game that decided our play off appearance~!!

Regarding the Patsies, remember back in the day when a team that was considered a dynasty was considered that because of their , performances that put teams two and three lapse behind.

The Jaguars are going to take us back to the day when a team was considered a Dynasty not because of photo finishes week in and week out, but by putting teams two and three scoring lapse behind. Thats how you establish a dynasty, Not trying to take anything away from the draft, cap and coaching management that breeds winners in NE, but I absolutely refuse to call them a dynasty.

 

[Jagsbch]

But why would we want to ?


I'm no ones bee-y-atch.

Its Beach...

I lived in Jax bch long before the Jaguars came to town, now you can hardly recognize the place, I now call it Jags Bch rather than Jax Bch hense the name.

 

[throwANDREtheBALL]

Sorry buddy, I didn't know.

AND I am with you now, I hope that Byron has a great season and that Jack Del Rio doesn't lose his cool again in the dressing room, pulling a hissy fit. Jack takes a lot of flack, but, he's got the potential to be a good motivator.

 

[Jagsbch]

Jack is a great motivator, I think he is a great guy myself. Having a coach like Jack allows not only players to be all they can be, but also a guy like me to be all the homer he can be.

 

[THEFUTURE]

what i dont get any comments regarding my earlier post jagsbch, i figured as much.. i am a highly regarded jag killa.. so its smart of you just to ignore my post, cuz you definatly cant touch me on my posts... as for not calling the Pats a dynasty... ... and for you to believe your kitties can be one you ... what are you thinking, you claim to be a dynasty, but as you say you play down to weaker opponents, which is still a lame reason for losing games, Dynasties dont play down to teams either, and how many games have the jags blown opponents out by, ummm none i can remember... now on to your OC, its hard to utilize talent, when you dont have any... Not going to break tradition and go to superbowl in own town... LAME LAME LAME dont hand me that stuff

 

[jr0ck]

The Jaguars are going to take us back to the day when a team was considered a Dynasty not because of photo finishes week in and week out, but by putting teams two and three scoring lapse behind.

from dictionary.com

dynasty-
1. A succession of rulers from the same family or line.
2. A family or group that maintains power for several generations: a political dynasty controlling the state

clearly refering to longevity, with no mention of the disparity between ruler/victor and the subjects/opponent. an analogous political term for how you define dynasty is probably totalitarian or dictatorship ; and for the record the jags have never resembled either.

 

[YodAa]

If your asking for QB
I want Carr

if your asking OL
I want Byron

 

[TheOgre]

not only is this what the patriots have done to solidify themselves as a dynasty, in the era of free agency mind you, but it's also what the jaguars have lacked doing against the texans in our short history.

I consider the Patriots the weakest dynasty in football (and perhaps all professional sports) history. There is no denying they won 3 Super Bowls. You also have to realize, though, that they won them by the seat of their pants. In all three games, they seemed to be holding on for dear life after having good leads in all of them. The first two even took last second FG's to win them. There is no way I clump them in the same category as the 70's Steelers, 80's 49ers, or 90's Cowboys.

I really cannot fault someone for not considering them a dynasty, because they are riding on the fence for me at this time.

 

[Porky]

I consider the Patriots the weakest dynasty in football (and perhaps all professional sports) history. There is no denying they won 3 Super Bowls. You also have to realize, though, that they won them by the seat of their pants. In all three games, they seemed to be holding on for dear life after having good leads in all of them. The first two even took last second FG's to win them. There is no way I clump them in the same category as the 70's Steelers, 80's 49ers, or 90's Cowboys.

I really cannot fault someone for not considering them a dynasty, because they are riding on the fence for me at this time.

I totally disagree, but unfortetely, I don't have much time to expound. Let me leave you with one thought - Free Agency

 

[gwallaia]

The Jaguars are going to take us back to the day when a team was considered a Dynasty not because of photo finishes week in and week out, but by putting teams two and three scoring lapse behind..

This is the
BIGGEST HOMER remark I've read since, well since your typical Titan fan ever opened their mouth.

 

[jr0ck]

I consider the Patriots the weakest dynasty in football (and perhaps all professional sports) history. There is no denying they won 3 Super Bowls. You also have to realize, though, that they won them by the seat of their pants. In all three games, they seemed to be holding on for dear life after having good leads in all of them. The first two even took last second FG's to win them. There is no way I clump them in the same category as the 70's Steelers, 80's 49ers, or 90's Cowboys.

personally, i consider a team who consistantly wins close games just as impressive as a team that blows out opponents. like i said above, winning is winning. and not to mention the patriots barely won their way to the longest winning streak in NFL history. it's hard not to consider the patriots with the dynasty's mentioned above because the football landscape has been overhauled so much since the last time any of those teams hit the field. don't take this the wrong way, this is my opinoin and my intent is not to change yours, just needed to expound a little more on my POV

 

[Jwwillis]

Look the Jaguars have always been known for their playing down to teams, Texans pretty much proven this Reality. For some reason the Jags have had a rough time getting it up for the Texans, Maybe we feel sorry about how the whoel Tony deal went down, or we just want to make our division look tough, or who knows, but I suspect this reality will be a thing of the past. I just love how you all gloat about us playing down to you, I guess I won't feel bad smacking you all around when we sweep you all this season, but don't feel bad we will be sweeping the entire division.

How do you play down to a team that consistantly beats you?? Sounds more like stupidity or denial.

 

[OzzO]

Well Jack knew he needed to get a guy in here who would help cater to Byron's stle of play rather than bring a guy in who would force byron to be something he is not.

Now, that is an interesting point from Jagsbch as actually, I heard the same thing mentioned on 610 (not about Jags or Texans... actually forget who it was about... I think it was the Pats OC) but they mentioned that's what makes a good coach - one that can adjust their game planning and style to suit the players and the team as a whole that currently is playing. Not one that has such an ego about their style of play that they force the players to work towards the coach's preferred system.

Would y'all think this is POSSIBLY what is causing the Texans demise to this point... or is it still the "newness" of the team?

 

[TexanFanInCC]

How else can you explain Jimmy out playing AJ last season?

Pshh he barely outplayed him. i already told u AJ's stats from the last 4 games of the season. the reason y he wasnt thrown to much was bc our o-line crumbled. AJ could have easily ended with 1400+ yds and 10 tds. i dont remember who, but someone said that if u put byron under our o-line, he would proly have one of the bottom 5 QB ratings in the league and he would surely be sacked waaay more (if he somehow manages to not hurt himself like he did versus the powerful and grand pass rush of the texans last year....lol)

 

[ojthecat]

Would y'all think this is POSSIBLY what is causing the Texans demise to this point... or is it still the "newness" of the team?

I dont think it is fair to use the word demise. Look the Texans have improved every year. Where is the "demise"?

 

[ATX]

i'd take carr over leftwich anyday. leftwich is probably the slowest guy on the jags offense and thats sad. and i'd also take AJ over J. Smith too. AJ deserved to be named to the probowl, sorry jags fan, you just don't get to see what we see here in houston. just look at the 2004 highlight reel for AJ, he made some unbelievable catches, something Smith couldn't do. i'm also predicting we sweep the jags once again, if there's one team the texans own in the league its the jags. i love beating the jags, mmmm it feels so good.

 

[OzzO]

I dont think it is fair to use the word demise. Look the Texans have improved every year. Where is the "demise"?

Okay, so demise isn't the best possible word (except you wouldn't know it by some of the posts on the board). I agree, the Texans have improved, I guess my thought process is, would they be further along in the progression if coaches had tweaked their style to better match what type of players we had (have)?

 

[Texan Dave]

Actually this poll is going just as I expected...

I think that Having Jimmy to throw too, is a better option than AJ, Jimmy proved that much last year, remember the poll I started? How AJ went to the Pro Bowl ahead of Jimmy is beyond me. It made it all too clear in my eye's that performance on the field is not the criteria the NFL uses to send players to the Pro Bowl~!! :brickwall

I think Byron is far and away a better QB than Carr, I will be willing top go as far as saying that Byron will have a better season than Peyaton this year. Byron is just as tough as Carr, having proved that with a broken leg in college.

Just keep the poll rolling, not that I don't have confidence in Carr, it's just that I hold Byron in the highest esteem. I think that our division has the best QB's of any division in this league.

Remember, this is the same person who was talking about the Jags being one of the winningest franchises in NFL history.....roles eyes...

 

[GoPats]

Regarding the Patsies, remember back in the day when a team that was considered a dynasty was considered that because of their , performances that put teams two and three lapse behind.

The Jaguars are going to take us back to the day when a team was considered a Dynasty not because of photo finishes week in and week out, but by putting teams two and three scoring lapse behind. Thats how you establish a dynasty, Not trying to take anything away from the draft, cap and coaching management that breeds winners in NE, but I absolutely refuse to call them a dynasty.

No disrespect intended, especially since this is my first post on this message board, but I think your argument lacks any basis of fact or truth -- regardless of whether you take the "winning is winning" approach or believe that a dynasty team has to obliterate everyone in its way.

At least let me explain...

The Patriots are 28-2 over the past two regular seasons, and 34-2 if you count the playoffs. In 2004, they won 11 of those 14 regular season games by 10 or more points, and then beat the best offensive team in the league (the Colts) 20-3 and the best defensive team (the Steelers, who may have been the best all-around, on paper) 41-27. I don't know if you watched either of those games, but neither was ever close. It was pretty much a one-sided affair in both cases.

I'd also point out that during this two-year stretch, the Jags had one shot at the Patriots and lost by 14 points. Not a blowout, but also not really a close game as I remember it.

The NFL is different from how it was back in the days of the 90s Cowboys, the 80s 49ers, the 70s Steelers and so on. You'd have to be blind to not admit that there's more parity. In the 1970s, teams didn't go from 4-12 to 12-4 like the Chargers did last year. It just didn't happen. So winning in today's NFL the way the Patriots have is even more impressive. Jimmy Johnson, a good friend of Belichick, said after the Super Bowl that he thinks the Patriots' achievements in this new era of the NFL are more impressive than what his Cowboys did in the 90s. His words, not mine.

Call it whatever you want, I really don't mind either way... your opinion is your opinion, and it doesn't need to be based in fact for it to be so. But winning three out of four (and, in my opinion, being primed to be 4-for-5) Super Bowls, and carrying a 48-16 record (57-16, again if you count playoffs) in four years is nothing short of dominance.

EDIT/PS - By the way, others have mentioned close Super Bowls... isn't that what's supposed to happen? When the two best teams meet at the end of the year, isn't it supposed to be a hard-fought nail-biter? Maybe we got so used to Super Blow Outs that we can't appreciate the effort that it takes to win a CLOSE, evenly-fought game. Which, if you've ever played a sport, you'd know is harder to do, requires more "clutch" performances, and in the end is more satisfying than sending someone home bruised and battered.

 

[TEXANS84]

Good to see you over here GoPats, excellent post.

 

[GoPats]

Good to see you over here GoPats, excellent post.

Thanks man!

 

[TEXANS84]

GoPats, I'd be curious to see what your opinion on the subject at hand (Carr/Leftwich) is from a "neutral source".

 

[TheOgre]

In the 1970s, teams didn't go from 4-12 to 12-4 like the Chargers did last year. It just didn't happen.

1981 isn't that far removed from the 70's and both teams, San Fran. (6-10 to 13-3) and Cinci.(6-10 to 12-4), had losing records the previous year, were the #1 seeds in the playoffs, and met in the Super Bowl.

While mastering free agency is an extra item on the plate, I think it is over-emphasized. The teams the use free agency to build are few and far between. The teams that stay on the top, tend to build primarily through the draft. Just look at Baltimore, Philly, and New England. Pittsburgh could be thrown in there too. They do a pretty good job of reloading through the draft. It is the lifebread of the league much like it was in the 70's, 80's, and 90's.

 

[GoPats]

1981 isn't that far removed from the 70's and both teams, San Fran. (6-10 to 13-3) and Cinci.(6-10 to 12-4), had losing records the previous year, were the #1 seeds in the playoffs, and met in the Super Bowl.

While mastering free agency is an extra item on the plate, I think it is over-emphasized. The teams the use free agency to build are few and far between. The teams that stay on the top, tend to build primarily through the draft. Just look at Baltimore, Philly, and New England. Pittsburgh could be thrown in there too. They do a pretty good job of reloading through the draft. It is the lifebread of the league much like it was in the 70's, 80's, and 90's.

True, and good points... since there's no clear definition of "Dynasty" (at least in relation to sports teams), then it's all subjective. I guess the idea I was trying to relay (which I still think is true) is that there was a wider gap between the best and worst teams in the 1970s, 80s, and 90s than there is today.

 

[GoPats]

GoPats, I'd be curious to see what your opinion on the subject at hand (Carr/Leftwich) is from a "neutral source".

I picked Carr on this one. I think they should both end up having good years, but Leftwich missed some time in '04 and I believe Carr will progress more quickly. I also think he's got better (younger) weapons around him, especially his RB.

The Texans came damn close to beating NE in 2003 at Reliant... if they'd won that game, the whole playoff scene might've been different. It was a more than respectable effort from the Texans...

 

[Jagsbch]

The Patriots are 28-2 over the past two regular seasons, and 34-2 if you count the playoffs. In 2004, they won 11 of those 14 regular season games by 10 or more points, and then beat the best offensive team in the league (the Colts) 20-3 and the best defensive team (the Steelers, who may have been the best all-around, on paper) 41-27. I don't know if you watched either of those games, but neither was ever close. It was pretty much a one-sided affair in both cases.

I'd also point out that during this two-year stretch, the Jags had one shot at the Patriots and lost by 14 points. Not a blowout, but also not really a close game as I remember it.

I'd also like to point out that the Jags were still in the process of coming out of the hell TC put us in with the Cap. Why if it wasn't for the Texans we would probably still be in hell, and Jimmy, Darius and Brady would more than likely been cut.

Beating a team coached by a rookie HC and as well as having a rookie QB at the helm is nothing to brag about. BTW the game was actually close, it was close in the first half, and no one scored in the 3rd quarter, the 2 int's by the rookie QB pretty much cost us the game as it put NE on our 3 yard line. Musgrave was a lousy coordinator he abandoned the run Taylor only had 16 carries...

Why am I rambling? My point is who have the Patriots beat really. Let's look at 11 of their opponents in 04 ~!!


2004
SanFran .125
Browns .250
Miami .250 (beat the patriots)
Arizona .375
Chiefs .438
Bengals .500
Rams .500
Ravens .562
Seattle .562

2003
Giants .250
Was .312
Browns .312
Bills .375
Jets .375
Jags .312
Texans .312

9 games in 03 were played against teams that weren't even .400. WOW the past 2 years 14 games have been against teams that were not even .400. And only 3 of those teams had 6 wins under their belt.

I* love the spin 28-2??? Get it right it's 28 and 4 the past two seasons.
Bill's .375 and Skins .312 beat you all in 03.
Miami .250 and the Steelers did it in 04.

WOW What a dynasty beaten by three teams no better than .375, oh and a rookie QB~!!

Half of the wins came from teams no better than .375. Check that I forgot two of thos teams actually beat the Pats, so I guess you can add the two .500 teams as half. Sorry but no way in hell I consider the Patsies a dynasty.

 

[GCODE]

Carr ........

 

[TexanFanInCC]

I'd also like to point out that the Jags were still in the process of coming out of the hell TC put us in with the Cap. Why if it wasn't for the Texans we would probably still be in hell, and Jimmy, Darius and Brady would more than likely been cut.

Beating a team coached by a rookie HC and as well as having a rookie QB at the helm is nothing to brag about. BTW the game was actually close, it was close in the first half, and no one scored in the 3rd quarter, the 2 int's by the rookie QB pretty much cost us the game as it put NE on our 3 yard line. Musgrave was a lousy coordinator he abandoned the run Taylor only had 16 carries...

Why am I rambling? My point is who have the Patriots beat really. Let's look at 11 of their opponents in 04 ~!!


2004
SanFran .125
Browns .250
Miami .250 (beat the patriots)
Arizona .375
Chiefs .438
Bengals .500
Rams .500
Ravens .562
Seattle .562

2003
Giants .250
Was .312
Browns .312
Bills .375
Jets .375
Jags .312
Texans .312

9 games in 03 were played against teams that weren't even .400. WOW the past 2 years 14 games have been against teams that were not even .400. And only 3 of those teams had 6 wins under their belt.

I* love the spin 28-2??? Get it right it's 28 and 4 the past two seasons.
Bill's .375 and Skins .312 beat you all in 03.
Miami .250 and the Steelers did it in 04.

WOW What a dynasty beaten by three teams no better than .375, oh and a rookie QB~!!

Half of the wins came from teams no better than .375. Check that I forgot two of thos teams actually beat the Pats, so I guess you can add the two .500 teams as half. Sorry but no way in hell I consider the Patsies a dynasty.

forget what they did in the regular season. the pats win when it counts. after losing to pittsburgh in the regular season, they went back to pittsburgh and crushed the steelers on their home turf. they also OWNED the leagues bestg offense and made them look like a 2002 texans offense that couldnt protect the QB. the fact of the matter is, regular season doesnt mean jack. bill billichek has NEVER lost a postseason game with the pats in three trips to the postseason. tom brady has played his best football in the postseason. these guys are clutch. enough said...

 

[Doom Capers]

I would rather have a Qb who actually has mobility. So yes, Carr......

 

[FILO_girl]

I'd also like to point out that the Jags were still in the process of coming out of the hell TC put us in with the Cap. Why if it wasn't for the Texans we would probably still be in hell, and Jimmy, Darius and Brady would more than likely been cut.

Beating a team coached by a rookie HC and as well as having a rookie QB at the helm is nothing to brag about. BTW the game was actually close, it was close in the first half, and no one scored in the 3rd quarter, the 2 int's by the rookie QB pretty much cost us the game as it put NE on our 3 yard line. Musgrave was a lousy coordinator he abandoned the run Taylor only had 16 carries...

Why am I rambling? My point is who have the Patriots beat really. Let's look at 11 of their opponents in 04 ~!!


2004
SanFran .125
Browns .250
Miami .250 (beat the patriots)
Arizona .375
Chiefs .438
Bengals .500
Rams .500
Ravens .562
Seattle .562

2003
Giants .250
Was .312
Browns .312
Bills .375
Jets .375
Jags .312
Texans .312

9 games in 03 were played against teams that weren't even .400. WOW the past 2 years 14 games have been against teams that were not even .400. And only 3 of those teams had 6 wins under their belt.

I* love the spin 28-2??? Get it right it's 28 and 4 the past two seasons.
Bill's .375 and Skins .312 beat you all in 03.
Miami .250 and the Steelers did it in 04.

WOW What a dynasty beaten by three teams no better than .375, oh and a rookie QB~!!

Half of the wins came from teams no better than .375. Check that I forgot two of thos teams actually beat the Pats, so I guess you can add the two .500 teams as half. Sorry but no way in hell I consider the Patsies a dynasty.

Why you are on a Texans board and barking about the Pats makes no sense. But in response to your post...

First 2 paragraphs, typical Jaguar whining about "but, but, but!!". But NOTHING. Should rename your team the "Excuses". Why? Because that is all y'all want to whine about.

I do believe that 32 teams have a chance at the Super Bowl every year. 2 make the cut, one takes it all. Now if the Jags (note, no stupid nickname, but I can pull out Jackals again if need be) don't make the cut, whose fault is it? THE JAGS. There are no excuses, you weren't good enough. It is pretty simple. YOU ARE NOT SB CALIBER. GET OVER IT.

While there are alot of folks (me being one) who are not too hip to the Pats and alot of their fan base (Go Pats is cool though), you can't deny that they are a good team and have won consecutive Super Bowls. While it may not meet the criteria of 'dynasty' for alot of people (me included), the media and other fans think they do, but you have to admit this...they do have the right to look down on 31 other teams and say "we OWN you".

A win is a win, is a win. The faster you learn this bch, the better off you will be. You carry that violin with you wherever you go?

 

[gwallaia]

Why am I rambling? My point is who have the Patriots beat really. Let's look at 11 of their opponents in 04 ~!!


2004
SanFran .125
Browns .250
Miami .250 (beat the patriots)
Arizona .375
Chiefs .438
Bengals .500
Rams .500
Ravens .562
Seattle .562

2003
Giants .250
Was .312
Browns .312
Bills .375
Jets .375
Jags .312
Texans .312

Good thing the Patriots don't "play down" to their opponents like the Jaguars do.

 

[GoPats]

Why am I rambling? My point is who have the Patriots beat really. Let's look at 11 of their opponents in 04 ~!!

2004
SanFran .125
Browns .250
Miami .250 (beat the patriots)
Arizona .375
Chiefs .438
Bengals .500
Rams .500
Ravens .562
Seattle .562

2003
Giants .250
Was .312
Browns .312
Bills .375
Jets .375
Jags .312
Texans .312

9 games in 03 were played against teams that weren't even .400. WOW the past 2 years 14 games have been against teams that were not even .400. And only 3 of those teams had 6 wins under their belt.

I* love the spin 28-2??? Get it right it's 28 and 4 the past two seasons.
Bill's .375 and Skins .312 beat you all in 03.
Miami .250 and the Steelers did it in 04.

WOW What a dynasty beaten by three teams no better than .375, oh and a rookie QB~!!

Half of the wins came from teams no better than .375. Check that I forgot two of thos teams actually beat the Pats, so I guess you can add the two .500 teams as half. Sorry but no way in hell I consider the Patsies a dynasty.

Hey that's fine... like I said, I don't really care. I just figured I'd see if their overall record (and the "28-2" thing was a mistake, not a "spin") would make any difference to you.

Anyone with an Internet connection, enough time, and a chip on their shoulder can go online and figure this stuff out. I only have one of those three things at this moment, but I would bet if you look at the schedules of past "dynasty" teams, the winning percentage of opponents would be right in line with what the Patriots have faced over the past couple of years.

No need to get all riled up and snippy, by the way. Instead, as a Jags fan, maybe you can wait until midseason when you actually have a reason to be pissed off.

 

[Lucky]

...Instead, as a Jags fan, maybe you can wait until midseason when you actually have a reason to be pissed off.

I wish I had said that.

 

[aj.]

who have the Patriots beat really

Only a delusional gags fan could spin it like this when talking about the twice defending Super Bowl champs.

Who have they beat?

In '04 they beat the Colts (12-4), Steelers (15-1), and Eagles (13-3) in their last three games - when it counted.

In '03 they beat the Titans (12-4), Colts (12-4), and Panthers (11-5) in their last three games - when it counted.

Also in '04 with a playoff spot on the line and on their home field, the Jags were shutout by the Texans 21-0 - when it counted.

 

[TEXANS84]

No need to get all riled up and snippy, by the way. Instead, as a Jags fan, maybe you can wait until midseason when you actually have a reason to be pissed off.

Also in '04 with a playoff spot on the line and on their home field, the Jags were shutout by the Texans 21-0 - when it counted.

Back to back best quotes I have seen on this board in a long time.

 

[THEFUTURE]

jagsbch, the only two teams the jags beat last year that were of any good were the Broncos and the Colts...
teams you beat
Buffalo-by 3
Broncos- by 1
Tenn- by 3
Cheifs-by 6
Colts-by 3
Detroit- by 6
Chicago- by 19 (whoo hoo! its chicago)
Green Bay- by 3
Oakland- by 7

its not exactly like the jags were a power house, and crushing teams last year...
teams you lost to
colts-by 7
chargers- by 13
Texans- by 14
Tenn- by 3 (wait you lost to tennessee, hahahaha)
Minn- by 11
Pitt- by 1
Texans- by 21 (with playoffs on the line, you score a big fatty goose egg)

Jags scored a total of 254 points to their opponents 280 points total... just some stats i thought i would through out... so before your little kitties can become a dynasty, in which hell would need to freeze over, they might wants to outscore their opponents, oh and next time you critizice someone on their Championship team, because they win close games, and somehow that makes them not so great... look in the mirror, cuz you didnt exactly demolish anyone last year

 

[El Tejano]

How AJ went to the Pro Bowl ahead of Jimmy is beyond me. It made it all too clear in my eye's that performance on the field is not the criteria the NFL uses to send players to the Pro Bowl~!! :brickwall


:

They probably figured since We beat the Jags twice and AJ had alot to do with that, AJ should get the nod.

Don't bang your head over it, just accept!

Nah, really I think JSmith doesn't care about ProBowls anymore, even when he gets voted his stomach starts to spasm.

 

[Vinny]

Jimmy Smith is a borderline hall of famer. Andre is young and quite the freak. He can have the old Smith, and I'm fine with the younger AJ.

 

[TopTexanFan16]

I wanna know who that Jags fan tallest and fastest reciever is?.....i mean we have mathis hint fastest and im pretty sure they dont have the tallest W/R unless u count in matt jones which i dont count him as a W/R yet and plaus he said he play w/r in the senior bowl.....am i mistaken or wasnt he a QB converted tow/e when he got drafted? j/w i could be wrong.

 

[jr0ck]

matt jones was a QB at arkansas in college, and played WR as in the senior bowl because of his crazy athletic ability combined with big questions about his arm (which i didn't see from a casual fans POV). he seemed to be a leader and a gamer as a QB, and i personally think his future would be brightest as a QB, but i hope he succeeds in the NFL (with no game winning catches against my h-town boys).

now onto the re-tar-ded argument from 'ol Jagshmr about the pats not beating quality teams. i ask you this, did the patriots choose their scehdule? did they pad their road to the superbowl with "chalk 'em up, sure fire" victories? is their such thing as a "chalk 'em up, sure fire" victory? what other options did the patriots have when playing the opponents they did? are there more than 32 teams in the NFL to choose from? did they need to play indy, pittsburg, philly, etc repeatedly over 16 games to prove their place in the football dynasty pantheon? the answer to all those questions in a big fat NO, which is why your line of thought has little validity, or even relevance, when discussing the patriots accomplishments. i end with this, winning is winning. i'll take an unbeaten season with nothing but last second 2 point safety victories than a season with record breaking offensive dominance (see colts) that is nothing but offensive records in the end.

"YOU PLAY TO WIN THE GAME"​

 

[Jagsbch]

did they need to play indy, pittsburg, philly, etc repeatedly over 16 games to prove their place in the football dynasty pantheon? the answer to all those questions in a big fat NO, which is why your line of thought has little validity, or even relevance,

Look here pal your entitled to your line of thinking and sobeit, but I base my criteria of a dynasty on higher standards. I think what NE did was impressive no doubt, but the jury is still out on them being a Dynasty in my book.

It is pretty simple. YOU ARE NOT SB CALIBER. GET OVER IT.

Panthers and Ravens were not considered SB CALIBER. GET OVER IT.

No need to get all riled up and snippy, by the way. Instead, as a Jags fan, maybe you can wait until midseason when you actually have a reason to be pissed off.

The only reasoned I'd be pissed is if Byron doesn't have at least 20 TDs and 2000 yards.

 

[jr0ck]

but the jury is still out on them being a Dynasty in my book

since your the only member on your jury, what do they have to do? win an unprecedented 4 superbowls in 5 years (which would be even better, believe it or not, than the other dynasty's you have in mind) , or just blow teams out well into the play-offs by a certain marigain?

 

[Jagsbch]

since your the only member on your jury,

Wrong again My sentament regarding the Patsies is shared by quite a few people, as a matter of fact there are three us in this thread alone.

 

[jr0ck]

you refrenced "the jury(s)" opinoin in "your book". i wasn't meaning you were the only person to have this idea. rather that you are the only one responsible for the contents of "your book", so it's up to you to decide what is in it, and more importantly why. and since you avoided my question, i will give you another chance to answer it. to refresh your memory,

what do they have to do? win an unprecedented 4 superbowls in 5 years (which would be even better, believe it or not, than the other dynasty's you have in mind) , or just blow teams out well into the play-offs by a certain marigain?

and now it is your turn to get hit over the head while i look cool in the background...

 

[THEFUTURE]

you refrenced "the jury(s)" opinoin in "your book". i wasn't meaning you were the only person to have this idea. rather that you are the only one responsible for the contents of "your book", so it's up to you to decide what is in it, and more importantly why. and since you avoided my question, i will give you another chance to answer it. to refresh your memory,



and now it is your turn to get hit over the head while i look cool in the background...

dont even worry about the guy, he wont give u an answer, he has proven that once he cant win an arguement, he decides to ignore it, until something else pops up he can write about

 

[Jagsbch]

What do they have to do?

Well since they have another season with over half the schedule averaging under .500 is make it back to the big show.

 

[TexansTrueFan]

ok this is the texans message board who do u think we'll pick ????????????? DAVID !!!

 

[GoPats]

since your the only member on your jury, what do they have to do? win an unprecedented 4 superbowls in 5 years (which would be even better, believe it or not, than the other dynasty's you have in mind) , or just blow teams out well into the play-offs by a certain marigain?

If they win 4-out-of-5, we'll probably still be hearing the same kind of stuff from Jagsbch and others... if the facts as they are fail to be convincing enough, I don't think another Lombardi trophy will make any difference. That said, I wouldn't change his opinion if I could. Belichick loves hearing stuff like this... makes for perfect motivational speeches.

 

[Jagsbch]

Like I said previously if the Patriots repeat I have problem with calling them a Dynasty. I am just not ready to come to such conclusions.

 

[GoPats]

Like I said previously if the Patriots repeat I have problem with calling them a Dynasty. I am just not ready to come to such conclusions.

Was that supposed to say, "I have NO problem calling them a Dynasty?" Just curious...