Jump to content

NY Jets Forum

Talk about Robert Saleh, Joe Douglas & the NFL in our NY Jets message board.


114,384 topics in this forum

    • 0 replies
    • 204 views
    • 20 replies
    • 723 views
    • 29 replies
    • 906 views
    • 269 replies
    • 6,969 views
  1. Q & A With Cotchery

    • 2 replies
    • 242 views
    • 4 replies
    • 349 views
    • 0 replies
    • 164 views
    • 32 replies
    • 991 views
    • 48 replies
    • 1,947 views
    • 7 replies
    • 244 views
    • 28 replies
    • 1,403 views
    • 16 replies
    • 888 views
    • 124 replies
    • 3,124 views
    • 105 replies
    • 2,956 views
  2. Sanchez Out For The Year?

    • 34 replies
    • 1,472 views
    • 2 replies
    • 353 views
    • 4 replies
    • 296 views
    • 8 replies
    • 525 views
    • 0 replies
    • 262 views
    • 6 replies
    • 474 views
    • 10 replies
    • 461 views
    • 0 replies
    • 109 views
    • 14 replies
    • 489 views
    • 0 replies
    • 77 views
    • 15 replies
    • 425 views
    • 0 replies
    • 87 views
  3. Ok Hard Knocks:Jets

    • 13 replies
    • 634 views
    • 17 replies
    • 709 views
    • 7 replies
    • 432 views
    • 0 replies
    • 94 views
    • 13 replies
    • 446 views
    • 23 replies
    • 666 views
    • 43 replies
    • 936 views
    • 0 replies
    • 105 views
    • 9 replies
    • 433 views
  • Posts

    • No, because the coach thought that the backup had earned the opportunity to challenge Zach, and he thought it would be good for Zach. It was not a negative on Zach's playing ability.
    • Your employer has no legal obligation to 'do anything' about your criminal behavior if it is on your own time and not part of the work you do for them.  Nobody is defending Echols' behavior, but you are completely misguided if you think the Jets have any more responsibility for this than Burger King would if one of their cashiers did it on their own time.  You are conflating deep pockets with increased responsibility, which is the hallowed ground of every ambulance chaser out there but, as other have said, just isn't a thing.   I don't recall hearing of the Raiders being liable for Ruggs....or the Patriots for Hernandez...and so on.  By your 'logic', the Dolphins would be responsible for child-support for Tyreek Hill's babies.  Everyone but you and the victim's attorney can see how much nonsense this is.  If it weren't the legal system would blow up with lawsuits overnight. If you want to blame the Jets for football things, go right ahead.  But this sounds like something you are trying to wish into existence.
    • You mean because he had not proven himself worthy? 
  • Available Subscriptions

×
×
  • Create New...