It's JimmyG Time!!!!

Share this page

bmooney54 said:
If JG lights it up, Brady could ask for a trade, ride the pine or retire. If the aforementioned occurs, I could give a fvck less what Brady decides. He won't be traded unless he wants to be. I really didn't think this would be so difficult to understand. :shrug_n:
Click to expand...

Trying to deflect, good strategy.

FWIW, getting traded at the end of a season is still getting traded, (which was the question originally asked that you seem to be having problems with). Bledsoe really was traded.
 
Jaric said:
I certainly wasn't. My argument was that Garap is the guy you consider trading Brady because he's almost 40 and will only be playing another 2-3 years.

The only reason the suspension is relevant is because it gives you a chance to see if Garap is indeed the player you all hope he is. (As well as you can in 4 games.)
Click to expand...
I'll make a serious post about this. 4 games probably isn't enough to make a true evaluation, unless he stinks it up. It takes around 4 games for teams to get enough game tape on a player to really determine what he's good and then be able to adequately game plan against them.

Once the QB gets to see how teams (that have studied him) will try to defend against him, we'll find out if he's the real deal or not.
 
Jaric said:
Ok, so we have "Irsay should have rubbed his balls on the way out." I think he did quite enough of that, but sure, we'll put you down as pro-Manning knob polishing. - Knob polishing. lol. How about not insult the entire career of the guy AND comparing him unfavorably to his number one nemesis? It was a new low even for the pill popper.

Do you have any idea why we didn't trade him? Yes.

Do you know how the contract language played into that decision?- That is what I said. Whose fault is that?

Also, you do know that Bill Polian was actually the one who neglected the backup QB situation not Jim Irsay right? The same Bill Polian who got fired after that debacle of a season. So if anyone "tanked" it would be the very people who all got fired/cut after the season for their efforts. - Yes. Again reason #10001 why the Dolts are not in the same universe as the Pats when it comes to the FO and why your musings about what the Pats may or may no do with their Qb situation is adorable.

So basically what you're arguing is that our front office was so in love with Andrew Luck that they were willing to give up their own jobs just so the franchise could possibly be able to draft him. Players had to be willing to end their careers just to make him a colt. - Even more adorable that you think a 2-14 season was not an obvious tank job when the team went 10-6 the year prior and 11-5 the year after.

Or option B is that we were simply unprepared for life without Manning because he'd never missed a game for like 10+ years and we determined a backup QB wasn't a good allocation of limited resources. That eventually turned out to be wrong, but there was solid logic behind it. - sure, I mean why EVER think much less prepare for a QB getting injured especially one that had neck/spine issues in his family.

So we have "gambled and lost" on one hand vs "vast unprovable conspiracy theory on the other." - whatever floats your boat.
Click to expand...
See responses above in bold.
 
Jaric said:
Ok, so we have "Irsay should have rubbed his balls on the way out." I think he did quite enough of that, but sure, we'll put you down as pro-Manning knob polishing Do you have any idea why we didn't trade him? Do you know how the contract language played into that decision? Also, you do know that Bill Polian was actually the one who neglected the backup QB situation not Jim Irsay right? The same Bill Polian who got fired after that debacle of a season. So if anyone "tanked" it would be the very people who all got fired/cut after the season for their efforts. So basically what you're arguing is that our front office was so in love with Andrew Luck that they were willing to give up their own jobs just so the franchise could possibly be able to draft him. Players had to be willing to end their careers just to make him a colt. Or option B is that we were simply unprepared for life without Manning because he'd never missed a game for like 10+ years and we determined a backup QB wasn't a good allocation of limited resources. That eventually turned out to be wrong, but there was solid logic behind it. So we have "gambled and lost" on one hand vs "vast unprovable conspiracy theory on the other."
Click to expand...
The problem with your argument is that it's based on hindsight.

How would Polian know that he was going to get sacked?
 
Mazz22 said:
See responses above in bold.
Click to expand...

Of all the condescending nonsense I'm only going I respond to:

Even more adorable that you think a 2-14 season was not an obvious tank job when the team went 10-6 the year prior and 11-5 the year after.
Click to expand...
because it's the height of absurdity.

10-6 QB - Peyton Manning
2-14 QBs - Kerry Collins, Curtis Painter, Dan Orlovsky
11-5 QB - Andrew Luck

GEE, I wonder what the difference was the year they went 2-14?

Also, considering we completely purged our roster and coaching staff after the 2-14 season, comparing Andrew Luck's first year to Mannings last is pointless because about the only consistent between those teams was Reggie Wayne and Robert Mathis. Everything else from the scheme to the roster to the coaching staff was completely different.
 
PatsFan09 said:
The problem with your argument is that it's based on hindsight.

How would Polian know that he was going to get sacked?
Click to expand...

My argument depends on hindsight? My argument doesn't hinge on Bill Poian not adequately addressing the backup QB situation and using that as evidence of something nefarious despite much more logical explanations.
 
Jaric said:
Of all the condescending nonsense I'm only going I respond to:

because it's the height of absurdity.

10-6 QB - Peyton Manning
2-14 QBs - Kerry Collins, Curtis Painter, Dan Orlovsky
11-5 QB - Andrew Luck

GEE, I wonder what the difference was the year they went 2-14?

Also, considering we completely purged our roster and coaching staff after the 2-14 season, comparing Andrew Luck's first year to Mannings last is pointless because about the only consistent between those teams was Reggie Wayne and Robert Mathis. Everything else from the scheme to the roster to the coaching staff was completely different.
Click to expand...

So at 0-8 you saw a coaching staff that was trying?
 
Mazz22 said:
So at 0-8 you saw a coaching staff that was trying?
Click to expand...

Well, it's hard to tell with Jim Caldwell, but yes.

The only time I saw the team "quit" was while we got pasted by the saints by like 50 points, but that had everything to do the specific game rather than some kind of nefarious plot to have a shitty record. Anyone who has played organized sports at some point has that game.
 
Mazz22 said:
lol. That is not happening off of a four game sample. Bill is not the pill popper who treated his franchize QB like dirt on the way out while watching him pump HGH and go on to have the best 4 years of his career in Denver while he doled out the richest contact to a QB who is a turnover machine. I mean you really can't make this stuff up but I can see why you would be here hoping the Pats handle their Qb situation better. :coffee:
Click to expand...
In the Colts defense, they had an all-around crappy team that even a bathtub full of HGH couldn't help, whereas the Broncos were loaded.
 
Jaric said:
Well, it's hard to tell with Jim Caldwell, but yes.

The only time I saw the team "quit" was while we got pasted by the saints by like 50 points, but that had everything to do the specific game rather than some kind of nefarious plot to have a shitty record. Anyone who has played organized sports at some point has that game.
Click to expand...
Yeah, unfortunately, ours was January 26, 1986. Couldn't do anything right, they could do nothing wrong.
 
spacecrime said:
Yeah, unfortunately, ours was January 26, 1986. Couldn't do anything right, they could do nothing wrong.
Click to expand...

If it's any consolation, that ass whooping you took was still way better than anything we did in 86. (I know it's not, but that's all I got for you.)
 
spacecrime said:
In the Colts defense, they had an all-around crappy team that even a bathtub full of HGH couldn't help, whereas the Broncos were loaded.
Click to expand...

The Broncos were not loaded. They loaded up once they signed ManninHGH. The Colts could have done the same but in reality Irsay had moved on once he fired Polian and his staff and wanted to start over with Luck. I don't blame him for that but I think he is realizing these days just how good of a GM Polian was compared to the slime ball Grigson.
 
spacecrime said:
Yeah, unfortunately, ours was January 26, 1986. Couldn't do anything right, they could do nothing wrong.
Click to expand...

And then we found out later many of the players, our players, had been up late doing "stuff" the night before the game.

Nutkick
 
I loved that BB presser. He even gave a few of his customory derisory snorts.

He's ready for the season.

I'm actually laughing watching the presser, he gave one questioner a classic death stare after he kept pressing on how BB will talk to Tom when the ban starts.
 
I think if BB could have a super power he'd opt for Vaders ability to halt a person in his vicinity breathing.

I think he'd enjoy that at times.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top