Matt39 Posted September 21, 2016 Share Posted September 21, 2016 *conspiracy* Bowles told Marshall to go after Revis that day in camp where they fought. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TuscanyTile2 Posted September 21, 2016 Share Posted September 21, 2016 Not sure if Revis is a lock but I'd say he's at least a shoe-in. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SenorGato Posted September 21, 2016 Share Posted September 21, 2016 21 hours ago, nyjunc said: I wouldn't waste my time w/ that poster. He is as clueless as they come. according to him Revis played no role in helping NE win and Sanchez, Rex, Tannenbaum, Schottenheimer all sucked but we lucked into 4 road playoff wins. To be fair, they did suck and there was an element of luck to those wins. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drdetroit Posted September 21, 2016 Share Posted September 21, 2016 22 hours ago, PatsFanTX said: Was You're right and we should have also given Kirk Cousins a long-term deal over giving Fitz a one year deal like you said Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nyjunc Posted September 21, 2016 Share Posted September 21, 2016 1 hour ago, SenorGato said: To be fair, they did suck and there was an element of luck to those wins. every good team has some "lucky" wins. winning 4 road games in the playoffs over 2 seasons is not luck. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PatsFanTX Posted September 21, 2016 Share Posted September 21, 2016 every good team has some "lucky" wins. winning 4 road games in the playoffs over 2 seasons is not luck. An All-Pro kicker missing 3 chip shot FG's is not lucky? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nyjunc Posted September 21, 2016 Share Posted September 21, 2016 19 minutes ago, PatsFanTX said: An All-Pro kicker missing 3 chip shot FG's is not lucky? I didn't realize a 57 yarder was a chip shot? lucky is a terrible rule where a QB fumbles the ball then they give it back to them or a K kicking it OOB to set up GW FG. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZachEY Posted September 21, 2016 Share Posted September 21, 2016 Fun Fact: Getting to back-to-back Championship games is not a major accomplishment and happens fairly frequently. Look it up. Fun Fact: Mike Tannenbaum was the longest tenured GM of his era to not have a Super Bowl appearance. How in the world do you celebrate a guy who never made it to a Super Bowl, and who's practices built a team that was good enough to do something that many teams do over the years and then left that team too old, too expensive, with too little depth, and almost completely devoid of young talent? Because that's Mike Tannenbaum's legacy. The fact that we're still rebuilding is a direct result of Mike Tannenbaum's overspending and trading draft picks for expensive veterans. Idzik's blown draft picks obviously play a large role, but outside of the draft, Idzik's tenure was spent cleaning up Tannenbaum's mess. GM's need to focus on the present while having long-term vision, and Tannenbaum went all-in and his magnum opus, which he mortgaged, and really decimated the future for, was holding a lead in an AFC Championship game for about 19-minutes. You want to make an argument for Rex -- at least he had highly ranked defenses, you want to make an argument for Sanchez -- at least the team had some success (despite him), but you want to make an argument for Mike Tannenbaum -- you just don't understand the role of NFL GM. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nyjunc Posted September 21, 2016 Share Posted September 21, 2016 33 minutes ago, gEYno said: Fun Fact: Getting to back-to-back Championship games is not a major accomplishment and happens fairly frequently. Look it up. Fun Fact: Mike Tannenbaum was the longest tenured GM of his era to not have a Super Bowl appearance. How in the world do you celebrate a guy who never made it to a Super Bowl, and who's practices built a team that was good enough to do something that many teams do over the years and then left that team too old, too expensive, with too little depth, and almost completely devoid of young talent? Because that's Mike Tannenbaum's legacy. The fact that we're still rebuilding is a direct result of Mike Tannenbaum's overspending and trading draft picks for expensive veterans. Idzik's blown draft picks obviously play a large role, but outside of the draft, Idzik's tenure was spent cleaning up Tannenbaum's mess. GM's need to focus on the present while having long-term vision, and Tannenbaum went all-in and his magnum opus, which he mortgaged, and really decimated the future for, was holding a lead in an AFC Championship game for about 19-minutes. You want to make an argument for Rex -- at least he had highly ranked defenses, you want to make an argument for Sanchez -- at least the team had some success (despite him), but you want to make an argument for Mike Tannenbaum -- you just don't understand the role of NFL GM. since 2000 back to back title game apps: NE numerous times Bal 2011-2012 NYJ 2009-2010 Pitt 2004-2005 only 3 AFC teams besides the NY jets have done it this Century the second part I don't know if it is true but no other GM w/ success had NE in their division and the greatest QB of all time to seal with. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maxman Posted September 21, 2016 Share Posted September 21, 2016 Yes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jet Nut Posted September 21, 2016 Share Posted September 21, 2016 3 hours ago, PatsFanTX said: An All-Pro kicker missing 3 chip shot FG's is not lucky? And as usual that would be wrong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZachEY Posted September 21, 2016 Share Posted September 21, 2016 1 hour ago, nyjunc said: since 2000 back to back title game apps: NE numerous times Bal 2011-2012 NYJ 2009-2010 Pitt 2004-2005 only 3 AFC teams besides the NY jets have done it this Century the second part I don't know if it is true but no other GM w/ success had NE in their division and the greatest QB of all time to seal with. You say "century" to exaggerate the timeframe, when in reality you're looking at 16 years. So, basically, in that 16 years, The pats have gone to consecutive title games 7x, the Ravens have gone 1x, the Jets have gone 1x, and Pitt has gone 1x. So, in 16 years, it's happened 10 times. And that's just in the AFC. On the other side, the Eagles did it 3x, the 49ers 2x, and the Seahawks once. The point being, that's not a valid measurement of success. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PatsFanTX Posted September 21, 2016 Share Posted September 21, 2016 You say "century" to exaggerate the timeframe, when in reality you're looking at 16 years. So, basically, in that 16 years, The pats have gone to consecutive title games 7x, the Ravens have gone 1x, the Jets have gone 1x, and Pitt has gone 1x. So, in 16 years, it's happened 10 times. And that's just in the AFC. On the other side, the Eagles did it 3x, the 49ers 2x, and the Seahawks once. The point being, that's not a valid measurement of success. Damn, junc just got owned. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nyjunc Posted September 21, 2016 Share Posted September 21, 2016 5 minutes ago, gEYno said: You say "century" to exaggerate the timeframe, when in reality you're looking at 16 years. So, basically, in that 16 years, The pats have gone to consecutive title games 7x, the Ravens have gone 1x, the Jets have gone 1x, and Pitt has gone 1x. So, in 16 years, it's happened 10 times. And that's just in the AFC. On the other side, the Eagles did it 3x, the 49ers 2x, and the Seahawks once. The point being, that's not a valid measurement of success. 16 years is a LONG time, only 4 teams in the AFC have made back to back title games. That's just 25% and we are one of those teams. so you are saying in the NFC only 3 teams have done it? 3 out of 16, less than 19%. Overall 7 of 32 teams, under 22% and we are one of those teams. That's pretty good. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PatsFanTX Posted September 21, 2016 Share Posted September 21, 2016 16 years is a LONG time, only 4 teams in the AFC have made back to back title games. That's just 25% and we are one of those teams. And 3 of those 4 teams went on to win Super Bowls. And that is what the AFCCG is for. Not just to get there and lose. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nyjunc Posted September 21, 2016 Share Posted September 21, 2016 2 minutes ago, PatsFanTX said: And 3 of those 4 teams went on to win Super Bowls. And that is what the AFCCG is for. Not just to get there and lose. I understand that but we only have 4 AFC title game apps in our history and 2 of them came under Tannenbaum. we shouldn't be building a statue but he should be thought of highly by Jet fans. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HessStation Posted September 21, 2016 Share Posted September 21, 2016 Are we still trying to pat ourselves on the back for losing AFCCG's here? 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PatsFanTX Posted September 21, 2016 Share Posted September 21, 2016 Are we still trying to pat ourselves on the back for losing AFCCG's here? If it walks like a duck...................... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZachEY Posted September 21, 2016 Share Posted September 21, 2016 32 minutes ago, nyjunc said: 16 years is a LONG time, only 4 teams in the AFC have made back to back title games. That's just 25% and we are one of those teams. so you are saying in the NFC only 3 teams have done it? 3 out of 16, less than 19%. Overall 7 of 32 teams, under 22% and we are one of those teams. That's pretty good. 26 minutes ago, PatsFanTX said: And 3 of those 4 teams went on to win Super Bowls. And that is what the AFCCG is for. Not just to get there and lose. As Tx says, this is not a meaningful accomplishment. It's happened quite a bit, and with no super bowl, and a prolonged rebuild following those appearances, no measure of success. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nyjunc Posted September 21, 2016 Share Posted September 21, 2016 3 minutes ago, gEYno said: As Tx says, this is not a meaningful accomplishment. It's happened quite a bit, and with no super bowl, and a prolonged rebuild following those appearances, no measure of success. you tried to tell me everyone does it, I proved that's not the case. it's not meaningful to a Pats fan that has seen 4 SB titles in the last 15 years, it should be meaningful to Jet fans that haven't seen a SB since the 1968 season. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZachEY Posted September 21, 2016 Share Posted September 21, 2016 6 minutes ago, nyjunc said: you tried to tell me everyone does it, I proved that's not the case. it's not meaningful to a Pats fan that has seen 4 SB titles in the last 15 years, it should be meaningful to Jet fans that haven't seen a SB since the 1968 season. No. I said, "it happens fairly frequently," which, on the AFC side, is 10x in 16 years. You manipulated it to be about the amount of teams that do it. You grade the team on a curve. Good for you. But, that's a loser's mentality. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nyjunc Posted September 21, 2016 Share Posted September 21, 2016 3 minutes ago, gEYno said: No. I said, "it happens fairly frequently," which, on the AFC side, is 10x in 16 years. You manipulated it to be about the amount of teams that do it. You grade the team on a curve. Good for you. But, that's a loser's mentality. 7 of 32 teams since 2000 is not frequent. it's frequent for the Brady's, it's not frequent for any other team. The Manning Colts or Broncos never made 2 title games in a row, the great Pitt teams have only done it one time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZachEY Posted September 21, 2016 Share Posted September 21, 2016 3 minutes ago, nyjunc said: 7 of 32 teams since 2000 is not frequent. it's frequent for the Brady's, it's not frequent for any other team. The Manning Colts or Broncos never made 2 title games in a row, the great Pitt teams have only done it one time. Still manipulating... Still celebrating back-to-back non-super bowl appearances. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PatsFanTX Posted September 21, 2016 Share Posted September 21, 2016 7 of 32 teams since 2000 is not frequent. it's frequent for the Brady's, it's not frequent for any other team. The Manning Colts or Broncos never made 2 title games in a row, the great Pitt teams have only done it one time. Why did you pick the year 2000 for your analysis? If you go back to the AFC-NFC merger, you theory really falls a part. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nyjunc Posted September 21, 2016 Share Posted September 21, 2016 1 minute ago, PatsFanTX said: Why did you pick the year 2000 for your analysis? If you go back to the AFC-NFC merger, you theory really falls a part. I was including recent, relevant history. what does 1975 have to do w/ now? it was a different game w/ different rules. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nyjunc Posted September 21, 2016 Share Posted September 21, 2016 8 minutes ago, gEYno said: Still manipulating... Still celebrating back-to-back non-super bowl appearances. all you had to say was "thank you for setting me straight from my silly post". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shawn306 Posted September 21, 2016 Share Posted September 21, 2016 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PatsFanTX Posted September 21, 2016 Share Posted September 21, 2016 I was including recent, relevant history. what does 1975 have to do w/ now? Good point, it has the same relevancy as 1969. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nyjunc Posted September 21, 2016 Share Posted September 21, 2016 2 minutes ago, PatsFanTX said: Good point, it has the same relevancy as 1969. unfortunately you are right and technically it was the 1968 season. I hate when they are called the '69 Jets. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HessStation Posted September 21, 2016 Share Posted September 21, 2016 9 minutes ago, nyjunc said: I was including recent, relevant history. what does 1975 have to do w/ now? it was a different game w/ different rules. I'm still not impressed Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nyjunc Posted September 21, 2016 Share Posted September 21, 2016 1 minute ago, HessStation said: I'm still not impressed thanks for your input. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greenwichjetfan Posted September 21, 2016 Author Share Posted September 21, 2016 13 minutes ago, nyjunc said: I was including recent, relevant history. what does 1975 have to do w/ now? Be sure to keep that in mind when you discuss college basketball national championships, too. Thanks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HessStation Posted September 21, 2016 Share Posted September 21, 2016 37 minutes ago, gEYno said: ... and a prolonged rebuild following those appearances, no measure of success. Correct Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nyjunc Posted September 21, 2016 Share Posted September 21, 2016 7 minutes ago, greenwichjetfan said: Be sure to keep that in mind when you discuss college basketball national championships, too. Thanks. ok, so 1999 and 2004 aren't recent. got it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HessStation Posted September 21, 2016 Share Posted September 21, 2016 3 minutes ago, nyjunc said: ok, so 1999 and 2004 aren't recent. got it. Why isn't 1998? What's your problem with 1998? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.