Jump to content

Luck Yes, Ge...No for Jet Fans?


Villain The Foe

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 217
  • Created
  • Last Reply

 

No one was more overrated than Elway imo.

 Funny, you hear that quite a bit about Elway. I know you feel that he wasnt any good until Shanahan came along, but he won some big ones , even before that (the Drive etc.) but his rings didnt come until he paired up with Shanahan.

Unfortunately, Like Sharpe, I am one of those who does think winning a ring is important, and I would clearly have put Marino in the TOP 5 if he had a ring, but without it, I just cant make him top 5.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 Funny, you hear that quite a bit about Elway. I know you feel that he wasnt any good until Shanahan came along, but he won some big ones , even before that (the Drive etc.) but his rings didnt come until he paired up with Shanahan.

Unfortunately, Like Sharpe, I am one of those who does think winning a ring is important, and I would clearly have put Marino in the TOP 5 if he had a ring, but without it, I just cant make him top 5.

 

Elway in the 80's was never viewed on Montana or Marino's level....even with "The Drive"

 

Winning a ring is important, but I'm not going to fault Marino for not lucking into Shanahan and Davis in the twilight of his career when he was the clear better player during their primes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

HessStation 4 months ago:

 

and there's still no doubting his immense talent, which is why he was the #3 overall pick and ran for 1,300 and 12 TDs in 10 games a year ago. 

 

There's obviously something wrong going on there. But, as opposed to you, I usually try to choose my words more carefully. Talent doesn't automatically equate to production. 

 

Tell me more about John Elway, I'm enthralled. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

and there's still no doubting his immense talent, which is why he was the #3 overall pick and ran for 1,300 and 12 TDs in 10 games a year ago. 

 

There's obviously something wrong going on there. But, as opposed to you, I usually try to choose my words more carefully. Talent doesn't automatically equate to production. 

 

Tell me more about John Elway, I'm enthralled.

 Whats to tell?

#1 overall selection out of Stanford, to the Bronco's because he refused to go to the Colts, in the most famous QB draft class in History. Won 2 SB's and retired after the 2nd. Engineered one of the most fanous drives, dubbed THE DRIVE, in NFL playoff history. Was a first ballot HOF, is a great golfer, and now is director of Football operations for his old team, and had the audacity to CUT TIM TEBOW in favor of PEYTON MANNING.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

lol

 

Why don't you tell me about John Elway instead, since you're never wrong on any player, ever,

 

Well, you see Matt, John Elway was one of the greatest QBs of all time. Shortly after formulating the laws of motion and universal gravitation he led the Broncos to six AFC Championship Games and five Super Bowls, winning his last two. He's is the only player to throw for over 3,000 yards and rush for over 200 yards in seven straight seasons, 1985–91...But perhaps more important than any other figure, his genius epitomized the Renaissance humanist ideal. He was named the AFC Offensive MVP in 1993 when he passed for 4,030 yards and 25 touchdowns. He had a quarterback rating of 92.8. But not to outdo himself, he then went on to win two Academy Awards for Best Actor and for Best Foreign Language Film. He was elected to the Pro Bowl 9 times and led the Broncos to 35 4th quarter comeback wins. WOW you say? How about being the guy who developed the theory of relativity and the electronic cigarette. He's third among most wins, fifth in TDs and is one of only four quarterbacks to pass for at least 3,000 yards in 12 seasons.  He famously led Indians in challenging the British-imposed salt tax with the 400 km (250 mi) Dandi Salt March. He abolished slavery and has won an NFL and Super Bowl MVP. 

 

He's in just about everyone's top 5 greatest list except yours. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, you see Matt, John Elway was one of the greatest QBs of all time. Shortly after formulating the laws of motion and universal gravitation he led the Broncos to six AFC Championship Games and five Super Bowls, winning his last two. He's is the only player to throw for over 3,000 yards and rush for over 200 yards in seven straight seasons, 1985–91...But perhaps more important than any other figure, his genius epitomized the Renaissance humanist ideal. He was named the AFC Offensive MVP in 1993 when he passed for 4,030 yards and 25 touchdowns. He had a quarterback rating of 92.8. But not to outdo himself, he then went on to win two Academy Awards for Best Actor and for Best Foreign Language Film. He was elected to the Pro Bowl 9 times and led the Broncos to 35 4th quarter comeback wins. WOW you say? How about being the guy who developed the theory of relativity and the electronic cigarette. He's third among most wins, fifth in TDs and is one of only four quarterbacks to pass for at least 3,000 yards in 12 seasons.  He famously led Indians in challenging the British-imposed salt tax with the 400 km (250 mi) Dandi Salt March. He abolished slavery and has won an NFL and Super Bowl MVP. 

 

He's in just about everyone's top 5 greatest list except yours. 

 

This is my favorite post of the week.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, you see Matt, John Elway was one of the greatest QBs of all time. Shortly after formulating the laws of motion and universal gravitation he led the Broncos to six AFC Championship Games and five Super Bowls, winning his last two. He's is the only player to throw for over 3,000 yards and rush for over 200 yards in seven straight seasons, 1985–91...But perhaps more important than any other figure, his genius epitomized the Renaissance humanist ideal. He was named the AFC Offensive MVP in 1993 when he passed for 4,030 yards and 25 touchdowns. He had a quarterback rating of 92.8. But not to outdo himself, he then went on to win two Academy Awards for Best Actor and for Best Foreign Language Film. He was elected to the Pro Bowl 9 times and led the Broncos to 35 4th quarter comeback wins. WOW you say? How about being the guy who developed the theory of relativity and the electronic cigarette. He's third among most wins, fifth in TDs and is one of only four quarterbacks to pass for at least 3,000 yards in 12 seasons.  He famously led Indians in challenging the British-imposed salt tax with the 400 km (250 mi) Dandi Salt March. He abolished slavery and has won an NFL and Super Bowl MVP. 

 

He's in just about everyone's top 5 greatest list except yours. 

 

So basically his career was saved by Mike Shanahan and was never as good as Montana or Marino. And during his prime he was closer to Kosar and Boomer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Well, you see Matt, John Elway was one of the greatest QBs of all time. Shortly after formulating the laws of motion and universal gravitation he led the Broncos to six AFC Championship Games and five Super Bowls, winning his last two. He's is the only player to throw for over 3,000 yards and rush for over 200 yards in seven straight seasons, 1985–91...But perhaps more important than any other figure, his genius epitomized the Renaissance humanist ideal. He was named the AFC Offensive MVP in 1993 when he passed for 4,030 yards and 25 touchdowns. He had a quarterback rating of 92.8. But not to outdo himself, he then went on to win two Academy Awards for Best Actor and for Best Foreign Language Film. He was elected to the Pro Bowl 9 times and led the Broncos to 35 4th quarter comeback wins. WOW you say? How about being the guy who developed the theory of relativity and the electronic cigarette. He's third among most wins, fifth in TDs and is one of only four quarterbacks to pass for at least 3,000 yards in 12 seasons.  He famously led Indians in challenging the British-imposed salt tax with the 400 km (250 mi) Dandi Salt March. He abolished slavery and has won an NFL and Super Bowl MVP. 

 

He's in just about everyone's top 5 greatest list except yours.

 How many Holes-in-one does he have?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You make a valid point, but you know, sometimes those "comeback wins" stats, not just for Geno but for all QB's are sometimes a bit crazy.

 

For example your team has say a 2 point lead with 5 minutes to go and your QB throws a pick and the other team, marches about 50 yards, kicks a field goal with about 1 minute left so they have a 1 point lead now. they kick off, your return guy returns it 60 yards, and now your "comeback QB" hands off 3 times to get to the middle of the field, to kick a game winning field goal, and your QB gets credited with a "Comeback 4th Quarter win".

 

Comebacks to me are like when Brady just recently was down 24 at halftime and won, or Luck was down about 28 in the playoff game and won.

 

If you have time, please look up the FARTHEST GENO ever "brought us back"? I specifically remember the Tampa Bay, and NE games where a penalty gave Geno a "comeback win" Hmmm.............

 

So now we're picking and choosing when game winning drives count simply because you cannot possibly fathom the idea of having to credit Geno for anything at all?  Surely you jest.

 

Not to mention, any attempts to dismiss the NE comeback win is unquestioned proof of nothing more than a completely biased agenda.  There's basically no reason anything you say about Geno can be taken seriously when you're making such a concerted effort to distort reality.  Amazing how when Geno leads the Jets to what should have been the win in regulation with a TD pass to Hill, it doesn't count because it was wiped away by a phantom penalty call.  However, when the Jets get a legitimate penalty in their favor in OT, one which the Pats were even warned about earlier in the game, the win somehow doesn't count according to your twisted logic.  So which one is it?  You can't have it both ways, those two positions completely contradict one another.  Either any penalty that influences the outcome of the game is illegitimate and you're forced to admit that the Jets rightfully won that game in regulation, or penalties simply need to be accepted as part of the game regardless if the call was correct and you have to concede that the Jets rightfully won in OT.  It's also interesting to note that in neither the TB or NE game, there's no evidence to support the theory that the Jets would have lost if not for the penalties in question; rather, it's your own assumption driven by an agenda.

 

Don't get me wrong, Geno has a loooooong way to go before he proves himself to be any sort of answer and the Jets could very well be done with him very soon, which is just fine.  Yet none of that in any way justifies such an absurd argument which is so desperate to constantly try to change the rules simply in order to somehow use the areas he did have success as a means of further criticism.  Geno did more than enough last year to legitimately base criticism upon, completely making up reasons is just sad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

.Also, the weapons argument is stupid. Do you really believe that our wide receivers would consistently fail to get open or that Geno is locking on to one read and just doesn't see the open receiver? Which one do you think, in all honestly, is more believable? 

 

And for the weapons argument, he also had a running game that people would stack the box for and a pretty good play caller in Marty who was scheming people open. He's just a bad qb.

 

The point is that he led the team to a respectable season, even though he came from a non-pro style college program and he had to deal severe offensive difficulties that would cause problems with an experienced QB.  Holmes was in and out with the Lisfranc, Hill was good for about 4 games then tanked, much as he did last year, Gates couldn't catch until his last game, when he then went down with a season-ending injury.  Like I said, receivers from Manpower.

 

Young QB's need at least one strong WR to make to turn errant plays into good ones, to get the young QB on track.  Eli was going nowhere until they got Plaxico-one year Plaxico was so injured that week after week he could not even practice but he played on Sundays.  Why?  Because he was about the only receiver Eli had the confidence to throw to.  Take away that confidence, and the young QB looks awful.

 

Our running game was OK with Ivory/Powell, but look at the difference in our offense in 2010 when LaDainian got there.  Having the defense required to adjust to a fast, tricky runner or pass catcher who can cause big problems when he is in space changes things, opens up all sorts of possibilities, and moves the chains.  Geno didn't have that either.

 

Far as I can see Geno moves way, way better than advertised and has a strong arm.  His accuracy will improve when he gets more confidence,  and he will get more confidence when he gets more successful completions to actual NFL receivers.

 

Oh, and I'm not remotely certain that with any competent veteran we make the playoffs.  Much of what was accomplished was due to Geno's ability to run well,  and a vet might not have that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So now we're picking and choosing when game winning drives count simply because you cannot possibly fathom the idea of having to credit Geno for anything at all?  Surely you jest.

 

Not to mention, any attempts to dismiss the NE comeback win is unquestioned proof of nothing more than a completely biased agenda.  There's basically no reason anything you say about Geno can be taken seriously when you're making such a concerted effort to distort reality.  Amazing how when Geno leads the Jets to what should have been the win in regulation with a TD pass to Hill, it doesn't count because it was wiped away by a phantom penalty call.  However, when the Jets get a legitimate penalty in their favor in OT, one which the Pats were even warned about earlier in the game, the win somehow doesn't count according to your twisted logic.  So which one is it?  You can't have it both ways, those two positions completely contradict one another.  Either any penalty that influences the outcome of the game is illegitimate and you're forced to admit that the Jets rightfully won that game in regulation, or penalties simply need to be accepted as part of the game regardless if the call was correct and you have to concede that the Jets rightfully won in OT.  It's also interesting to note that in neither the TB or NE game, there's no evidence to support the theory that the Jets would have lost if not for the penalties in question; rather, it's your own assumption driven by an agenda.

 

Don't get me wrong, Geno has a loooooong way to go before he proves himself to be any sort of answer and the Jets could very well be done with him very soon, which is just fine.  Yet none of that in any way justifies such an absurd argument which is so desperate to constantly try to change the rules simply in order to somehow use the areas he did have success as a means of further criticism.  Geno did more than enough last year to legitimately base criticism upon, completely making up reasons is just sad.

And to think, we cant adjust the "facts" to suit our agenda. What is this world coming to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So now we're picking and choosing when game winning drives count simply because you cannot possibly fathom the idea of having to credit Geno for anything at all?  Surely you jest.

 

Not to mention, any attempts to dismiss the NE comeback win is unquestioned proof of nothing more than a completely biased agenda.  There's basically no reason anything you say about Geno can be taken seriously when you're making such a concerted effort to distort reality.  Amazing how when Geno leads the Jets to what should have been the win in regulation with a TD pass to Hill, it doesn't count because it was wiped away by a phantom penalty call.  However, when the Jets get a legitimate penalty in their favor in OT, one which the Pats were even warned about earlier in the game, the win somehow doesn't count according to your twisted logic.  So which one is it?  You can't have it both ways, those two positions completely contradict one another.  Either any penalty that influences the outcome of the game is illegitimate and you're forced to admit that the Jets rightfully won that game in regulation, or penalties simply need to be accepted as part of the game regardless if the call was correct and you have to concede that the Jets rightfully won in OT.  It's also interesting to note that in neither the TB or NE game, there's no evidence to support the theory that the Jets would have lost if not for the penalties in question; rather, it's your own assumption driven by an agenda.

 

Don't get me wrong, Geno has a loooooong way to go before he proves himself to be any sort of answer and the Jets could very well be done with him very soon, which is just fine.  Yet none of that in any way justifies such an absurd argument which is so desperate to constantly try to change the rules simply in order to somehow use the areas he did have success as a means of further criticism.  Geno did more than enough last year to legitimately base criticism upon, completely making up reasons is just sad.

Also. they talk about having a hard time keeping us "JoeWillies/Joewilly" etc. seperated and identified but you Bleedingreen/Bleedgreen14 etc. are starting to get me confused now. LOL

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seriously, you are going to cite completely unrelated long past posts as an attempt to discredit a poster?  Come on, even you have to see the hypocrisy in that.

 

Also, it's Hess... in my book, Hess can do whatever he wants. He's the best.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The point is that he led the team to a respectable season, even though he came from a non-pro style college program and he had to deal severe offensive difficulties that would cause problems with an experienced QB.  Holmes was in and out with the Lisfranc, Hill was good for about 4 games then tanked, much as he did last year, Gates couldn't catch until his last game, when he then went down with a season-ending injury.  Like I said, receivers from Manpower.

 

Young QB's need at least one strong WR to make to turn errant plays into good ones, to get the young QB on track.  Eli was going nowhere until they got Plaxico-one year Plaxico was so injured that week after week he could not even practice but he played on Sundays.  Why?  Because he was about the only receiver Eli had the confidence to throw to.  Take away that confidence, and the young QB looks awful.

 

Our running game was OK with Ivory/Powell, but look at the difference in our offense in 2010 when LaDainian got there.  Having the defense required to adjust to a fast, tricky runner or pass catcher who can cause big problems when he is in space changes things, opens up all sorts of possibilities, and moves the chains.  Geno didn't have that either.

 

Far as I can see Geno moves way, way better than advertised and has a strong arm.  His accuracy will improve when he gets more confidence,  and he will get more confidence when he gets more successful completions to actual NFL receivers.

 

Oh, and I'm not remotely certain that with any competent veteran we make the playoffs.  Much of what was accomplished was due to Geno's ability to run well,  and a vet might not have that.

 

This is a case of giving the qb way to much credit for our wins. This is the same sh*t people were saying about Sanchez, that he got us to 2 AFC championship games. Geno was not the reason why we were 8-8. The defense and the run game willed our team to victory, much like the years Sanchez was qbing. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So now we're picking and choosing when game winning drives count simply because you cannot possibly fathom the idea of having to credit Geno for anything at all?  Surely you jest.

 

Not to mention, any attempts to dismiss the NE comeback win is unquestioned proof of nothing more than a completely biased agenda.  There's basically no reason anything you say about Geno can be taken seriously when you're making such a concerted effort to distort reality.  Amazing how when Geno leads the Jets to what should have been the win in regulation with a TD pass to Hill, it doesn't count because it was wiped away by a phantom penalty call.  However, when the Jets get a legitimate penalty in their favor in OT, one which the Pats were even warned about earlier in the game, the win somehow doesn't count according to your twisted logic.  So which one is it?  You can't have it both ways, those two positions completely contradict one another.  Either any penalty that influences the outcome of the game is illegitimate and you're forced to admit that the Jets rightfully won that game in regulation, or penalties simply need to be accepted as part of the game regardless if the call was correct and you have to concede that the Jets rightfully won in OT.  It's also interesting to note that in neither the TB or NE game, there's no evidence to support the theory that the Jets would have lost if not for the penalties in question; rather, it's your own assumption driven by an agenda.

 

Don't get me wrong, Geno has a loooooong way to go before he proves himself to be any sort of answer and the Jets could very well be done with him very soon, which is just fine.  Yet none of that in any way justifies such an absurd argument which is so desperate to constantly try to change the rules simply in order to somehow use the areas he did have success as a means of further criticism.  Geno did more than enough last year to legitimately base criticism upon, completely making up reasons is just sad.

 

I could give a rat's ass about comeback wins. The fact of the matter was, Geno failed to move the offense and often times put our defense in horrid positions. Nothing about him says he's a starting caliber qb and he frankly put, does not pass the eye test. He's awful. Sanchez also had comeback wins and was pretty good in the playoffs, and I hear no one hear calling for him to start.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is a case of giving the qb way to much credit for our wins. This is the same sh*t people were saying about Sanchez, that he got us to 2 AFC championship games. Geno was not the reason why we were 8-8. The defense and the run game willed our team to victory, much like the years Sanchez was qbing. 

That, and an incredible amount of good fortune at very opportune times. Their woeful point differential. (in fact a record for a .500 team) tells us that right away.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes it does.  I'd much prefer to win 2 games by 3 points and lose the third by 30 points than win one by 30 points and lose the next two by 3 points.

 

Screw the point differential.

Of course, but apparently that hasnt been happening for the past 3 years. Under your scenario (which of course I love) we would be winning at a .667 clip or 2 out of every 3, but the past 3 years we have been 8-8, 6-10, 8-8 or 22-26, so apparently the point differential, which indicates that we are a below .500 team the past 3 years is a better indicator of how the Jets normally perform as opposed to your win 2 by small margins and lose 1 big, as that .667 win percentage is not even close to reality, unless your the Patriots or Broncos.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2011 and 2012 the point differential reflected our record very well.  In 2013 our record was 8-8, but our point differential was worse than that.  Which indicates to me that when Geno gets lost, he gets real lost.  When Geno is still in the game, he can function efficiently.  All the more reason to surround him with genuine NFL receivers and a replacement for Leon/LaDainian to help him make plays.

 

When your two best wideouts, (one of whom was a midseason castoff from another team), have 500 and 400 yards repectively, the offense isn't going anywhere.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2011 and 2012 the point differential reflected our record very well.  In 2013 our record was 8-8, but our point differential was worse than that.  Which indicates to me that when Geno gets lost, he gets real lost.  When Geno is still in the game, he can function efficiently.  All the more reason to surround him with genuine NFL receivers and a replacement for Leon/LaDainian to help him make plays.

 

When your two best wideouts, (one of whom was a midseason castoff from another team), have 500 and 300 yards repectively, the offense isn't going anywhere.

Fair enough.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is a case of giving the qb way to much credit for our wins. This is the same sh*t people were saying about Sanchez, that he got us to 2 AFC championship games. Geno was not the reason why we were 8-8. The defense and the run game willed our team to victory, much like the years Sanchez was qbing.

Down the stretch, as the team finished 3-1, Geno was a huge part of that running game. Over the last month of the season, Ivory rushed for 270 yards and 1 TD, Powell rushed for 181 yards and no TDs, while Geno rushed for 186 yards and 3 TDs. It's a nice dimension to have while learning the QB position at the NFL level. In the end, Geno was nearly as big a part of the team winning eight games, as he was a part of losing eight games.

And Geno was learning. He really never should've been in the starting lineup, whether you want to blame Rex or Idzik for that really doesn't matter, but Geno shouldn't take the blame. He was subject to baptism by fire, and showed improvement at the end of the year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dude engineers the 2nd greatest comeback in NFL history in his 2nd season, and you're writing him off.  Ridiculous.  The kid has put up the numbers AND passes the eye test very early in his career.  He's going to be a star in this league for a long time.

 

 

He was awesome against NE...oh wait. He is SO overrrated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...