nyjunc Posted May 11, 2016 Share Posted May 11, 2016 6 minutes ago, neckdemon said: Lol of course you'd argue. Dude....WE WERE WINNING THE CHAMPIONSHIP GAME AT HALF TIME. At no point were we winning the Pittsburgh game. We were never closer to the superbowl since 1969 than we were in 1999. We were losing the Pittsburgh game for the entire game. We never had the lead. We never made a comeback.......we attempted a comeback but it never happened. who cares if we were winning at halftime? we led 3-0 at denver at the half, at Indy in 2009 we led 17-13 so that's a bigger margin w/ 2 more TDs scored but in both games we were dead by middle of the 4th qtr. at pitt we had a legit chance, we were w/in 5 w/ plenty of time to play and our D failed to get a stop. 1998 we led 10-0 in the 3rd(after recovering blocked punt at den 1 yd line for our only TD), after that we were outscored 23-0, we trailed 20-10 entering the 4th qtr, we trailed 23-10 w/ 4 mins left. 2010 we trailed 24-0, then trailed 24-3 at half. were w/in 24-10 early 3rd(essentially same difference as late in 1998), we trailed 24-12 the 24-19 w/ a ton of time and 2 TOs. we were MUCH closer to winning in 2010 at pitt than 1998 at denver. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nyjunc Posted May 11, 2016 Share Posted May 11, 2016 2 minutes ago, Integrity28 said: Agreed. I'd take it a step further and say that he's the most important person in the history of the game, given the significance of what an AFL team winning SBIII meant for the league. He's the man. I agree with that, I think he is the most important person in the growth of professional football to what it is today. I think his career on the field was overrated but what he meant to the game is underrated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruce Harper Posted May 11, 2016 Share Posted May 11, 2016 12 hours ago, FlaJetsFan said: In the early part of his NFL career, Joe was hit over and over again by players like Ben Davidson and Ike Lassiter (Oakland) aiming straight for his knees (and face). In those days, QBs were not protected like they are today by the rules they put in, after players like Joe ended up hobbled, if not worse. The thing is, Joe rarely if ever complained, and often made jokes about getting hit, such as the time when Lassiter broke his cheekbone. Joe made football hip to watch; football was not considered "cool" in the mid 60s, until he changed how the sport was viewed. He almost single-highhandedly put the AFL on the map, and he is the reason the merger happened when it did. Joe Namath transcends any other QB who ever played this game, despite his average play after '69. He is simply on a completely different level: almost every other AFL players after Super Bowl III felt as if they too had won that game that day; he gave them back their pride as players, and made this upstart league legit, with the help of Sauer, Maynard, Boozer, and Snell. This guy is a true legend, and he was a NY Jet, and not just a Jet, but THE NY Jet of all time. So if anyone is going to trash Joe Willie, he or she has absolutely no idea what they are talking about. Joe is now is involved with a medical research facility in South Florida that studies and treats head injuries. As far as I'm concerned, Joe can say whatever the hell he wants about this game: he will always be #1. What a great picture. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nyjunc Posted May 11, 2016 Share Posted May 11, 2016 4 minutes ago, Bruce Harper said: What a great picture. Joe was an underrated athlete, it's such a shame his career was robbed by injuries. Imagine what a healthy Joe could have done? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruce Harper Posted May 11, 2016 Share Posted May 11, 2016 Just now, nyjunc said: Joe was an underrated athlete, it's such a shame his career was robbed by injuries. Imagine what a healthy Joe could have done? I remember hearing that he had great speed as well before his knees got bashed up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nyjunc Posted May 11, 2016 Share Posted May 11, 2016 1 minute ago, Bruce Harper said: I remember hearing that he had great speed as well before his knees got bashed up. I believe he also got drafted in MLB as well and was also a good basketball player. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jetrider Posted May 11, 2016 Share Posted May 11, 2016 31 minutes ago, nyjunc said: I believe he also got drafted in MLB as well and was also a good basketball player. His best offer was $50K from Cubs in '61 . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jet Nut Posted May 11, 2016 Share Posted May 11, 2016 2 hours ago, nyjunc said: he didn't praise mark? this was in 2013 when his jet career was almost over: http://espn.go.com/blog/afceast/post/_/id/59312/namath-sees-big-things-from-mark-sanchez heck even now: Bob GlauberVerified account@BobGlauber Joe Namath said he believes Mark Sanchez could beat out Ryan Fitzpatrick, who had drawn some interest from Broncos. And thinking he could beat out Fitz, maybe, = Sanchez is great? Pretty low standards when Fitz is the benchmark for greatness Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neckdemon Posted May 11, 2016 Share Posted May 11, 2016 1 hour ago, nyjunc said: who cares if we were winning at halftime? we led 3-0 at denver at the half, at Indy in 2009 we led 17-13 so that's a bigger margin w/ 2 more TDs scored but in both games we were dead by middle of the 4th qtr. at pitt we had a legit chance, we were w/in 5 w/ plenty of time to play and our D failed to get a stop. 1998 we led 10-0 in the 3rd(after recovering blocked punt at den 1 yd line for our only TD), after that we were outscored 23-0, we trailed 20-10 entering the 4th qtr, we trailed 23-10 w/ 4 mins left. 2010 we trailed 24-0, then trailed 24-3 at half. were w/in 24-10 early 3rd(essentially same difference as late in 1998), we trailed 24-12 the 24-19 w/ a ton of time and 2 TOs. we were MUCH closer to winning in 2010 at pitt than 1998 at denver. I disagree. Actually leading in the 3rd quarter is much closer than never leading at all. The Pittsburgh game was second closest we came since 1969. Either way it doesn't matter because we fell short. Also in 1998 we won the division and had a bye. It was a better team Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nyjunc Posted May 11, 2016 Share Posted May 11, 2016 46 minutes ago, neckdemon said: I disagree. Actually leading in the 3rd quarter is much closer than never leading at all. The Pittsburgh game was second closest we came since 1969. Either way it doesn't matter because we fell short. Also in 1998 we won the division and had a bye. It was a better team we are allowed to disagree, we led early in the 3rd, by the end of the 3rd we were down 10 pts and the game was basically over while all we needed was one stop late at Pitt to have a chance. they could have allowed one 1st down just not 2 but our overrated D folded as usual. the 1998 season was a better season overall BUT keep in mind we didn't have the Brady Pats to deal with, if we did then that team also finishes 11-5 and probably as a WC team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.