Enjoy an Ads-Free Jets Insider - Become a Jets Insider VIP!
Page 6 of 8 FirstFirst ... 45678 LastLast
Results 101 to 120 of 153

Thread: I guess Aaron Rogers sucks now too?

  1. #101
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    3,016
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by ASG0531 View Post
    It's been suggested in his other thread about reaching 7-7 that OP is probably DWC. It makes perfect sense, from the staunch homerism all the way down to the complete butchering of statistics and logic in order to attempt to prove impossible points. This is exactly his style.
    The proper use of grammar and punctuation, plus the proper use of words containing more than two syllables, indicates to me that there's no chance this is DWC. His completely bogus use of statistics, however, is certainly DWC-esque.

  2. #102
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Posts
    52,055
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by billygreen View Post

    The point is, half the people posting here are very quick to rip the Jets to pieces for anything that goes wrong but very very quiet when one of the glory teams (Patriots, Steelers, Packers, Giants, ect) falls flat on it's face as the Packers did on nationwide tv this weekend.

    Patriots- 8-3 1st place
    Giants- 7-4 1st place
    Packers- 7-4 2nd place
    Steelers- 6-5 2nd place
    Jets- 4-7 Last place


    See the difference yet?

  3. #103
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    8,242
    Post Thanks / Like
    Some people are just ....

    Morons.

  4. #104
    Veteran
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    1,668
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by GuidoYaztremski View Post
    The proper use of grammar and punctuation, plus the proper use of words containing more than two syllables, indicates to me that there's no chance this is DWC. His completely bogus use of statistics, however, is certainly DWC-esque.
    "Bogus use of statistics"...


    Rather than just throwing an accusation out there how about some facts to back it up? Where are these imaginary "bogus usages" and how less relevant are they than the "bogus reviews" of the Jets organization so obviously posted by fans of another team with too much time on their hands?

  5. #105
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    3,016
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by billygreen View Post
    "Bogus use of statistics"...


    Rather than just throwing an accusation out there how about some facts to back it up? Where are these imaginary "bogus usages" and how less relevant are they than the "bogus reviews" of the Jets organization so obviously posted by fans of another team with too much time on their hands?
    Easy. Here's an example:

    Quote Originally Posted by billygreen View Post
    Really... You're quarterback completed 11% less of his passes and only threw for 20 more yards than Mark Sanchez, while your running attack put up exactly 30 more yards in the game. Show me where the total domination is in those statistics. All but one of your turnovers came off fumble recoveries, you only picked off one ball, and the fumbles you picked up weren't caused by you they were caused by the Jets.

    Please continue with your dream that the Patriots simply outplayed the Jets. The game was a GIFT, and you should accept it as a GIFT.
    This is a perfect example of statistics which do not support reality. Anyone who watched the game can see that Brady outperformed Sanchez by a huge margin. You discount the huge scoring differential chalking it up to turnovers, yet ignore the effect that those very same turnovers have on Brady's numbers.


    And I'd put up money that you are not DWC. More likely, you are Eternal Champion. This is exactly the type of bogus thread he enjoyed to get a rise out of the local populace.

  6. #106
    Veteran
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    1,668
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by GuidoYaztremski View Post
    Easy. Here's an example:



    This is a perfect example of statistics which do not support reality. Anyone who watched the game can see that Brady outperformed Sanchez by a huge margin. You discount the huge scoring differential chalking it up to turnovers, yet ignore the effect that those very same turnovers have on Brady's numbers.


    And I'd put up money that you are not DWC. More likely, you are Eternal Champion. This is exactly the type of bogus thread he enjoyed to get a rise out of the local populace.
    You're deranged. You're seeing ghosts everywhere. Anyone who attempts to attenuate the hysteria is labeled a "homer" and accused of being someone else. Ray Bradbury couldn't dream this kind of science fiction up.

    The facts stand for themselves. Mark Sanchez actually DID complete a higher percentage of his passes in the game than Tom Brady did, see the link below and check it out for yourself. Tom Brady actually DID only throw for 20 more yards than Sanchez, check the facts. The Patriots actually DID only run for 30 more yards in the game, click the link and read about it. Considering all of this, what else would you attribute to the Jets loss last thursday BUT the turnovers?

    Here's the entire boxscore of the game... Click the link and check the facts for yourself and tell me which are "BOGUS", and when you can't at least admit that you're a fan of a rival team that's only here to rip on the Jets and upset their fans, then tell us about all the other personas you have on the board so we know who we're dealing with okay?


    http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/boxscore...id=20121122020

  7. #107
    All League
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    4,868
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by billygreen View Post
    You're deranged. You're seeing ghosts everywhere. Anyone who attempts to attenuate the hysteria is labeled a "homer" and accused of being someone else. Ray Bradbury couldn't dream this kind of science fiction up.

    The facts stand for themselves. Mark Sanchez actually DID complete a higher percentage of his passes in the game than Tom Brady did, see the link below and check it out for yourself. Tom Brady actually DID only throw for 20 more yards than Sanchez, check the facts. The Patriots actually DID only run for 30 more yards in the game, click the link and read about it. Considering all of this, what else would you attribute to the Jets loss last thursday BUT the turnovers?

    Here's the entire boxscore of the game... Click the link and check the facts for yourself and tell me which are "BOGUS", and when you can't at least admit that you're a fan of a rival team that's only here to rip on the Jets and upset their fans, then tell us about all the other personas you have on the board so we know who we're dealing with okay?


    http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/boxscore...id=20121122020
    Im a Jet fan through and through and those stats mean NOTHING.

    There were 4 Game-Turning plays vs the patriots.

    1. Sanchez red zone INT
    2. Vereen Screen pass TD
    3. Sanchez fumble and subsequent return for TD
    4. McKnight Fumble

    If you notice, 2 of the 3 negative plays for the Jets were DIRECTLY sanchez's fault, while Tom Brady was part of 1 positive play for the pats.

    Stats dont tell the whole story. One QB threw 3 tds and led his team to an easy, 49-19 win while committing 0 turnovers. The other did the exact same thing he has done all year....turn the ball over in the redzone and then fumbled away the game. There really isnt much else to say about this.

  8. #108
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    49,680
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by billygreen View Post
    You're deranged. You're seeing ghosts everywhere. Anyone who attempts to attenuate the hysteria is labeled a "homer" and accused of being someone else. Ray Bradbury couldn't dream this kind of science fiction up.

    The facts stand for themselves. Mark Sanchez actually DID complete a higher percentage of his passes in the game than Tom Brady did, see the link below and check it out for yourself. Tom Brady actually DID only throw for 20 more yards than Sanchez, check the facts. The Patriots actually DID only run for 30 more yards in the game, click the link and read about it. Considering all of this, what else would you attribute to the Jets loss last thursday BUT the turnovers?

    Here's the entire boxscore of the game... Click the link and check the facts for yourself and tell me which are "BOGUS", and when you can't at least admit that you're a fan of a rival team that's only here to rip on the Jets and upset their fans, then tell us about all the other personas you have on the board so we know who we're dealing with okay?


    http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/boxscore...id=20121122020
    1. The fact that you decide who played better by a box score confirms your stupidity, and that you are DWC v.8

    2. WHO THE **** DO YOU THINK MADE THOSE TURNOVERS?????

    Hint: S_N_H_Z

  9. #109
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Posts
    52,055
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by billygreen View Post

    The facts stand for themselves. Mark Sanchez actually DID complete a higher percentage of his passes in the game than Tom Brady did, see the link below and check it out for yourself. Tom Brady actually DID only throw for 20more yards than Sanchez, check the facts.




  10. #110
    Veteran
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    1,668
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by FF2 View Post
    1. The fact that you decide who played better by a box score confirms your stupidity, and that you are DWC v.8

    2. WHO THE **** DO YOU THINK MADE THOSE TURNOVERS?????

    Hint: S_N_H_Z

    Uh... the accusation was made that the stats I posted were "Bogus stats" so I provided a boxscore link to the game so you could check them for yourself. My contention was that the turnovers made all the difference in the game because the Patriots had no dominant edge in any other aspect of the game.

    When you beat another team by 30 points the stats should at least support that win with some dominant edge statistics, but in this game there is no other dominant edge than the turnover differential (Jets had 5 fumbles and lost 4 of them). If you want to call that "homerism" or "bogus statistics" or "irrelevant facts" or whatever go ahead, but it demonstrates the true basis for you being here, which is to rip the team and upset the fanbase.

    Don't tell me the stats don't support anything in the game, they support a whole lot, and they tell the whole story if you're rational about it.

  11. #111
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    49,680
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by billygreen View Post
    Don't tell me the stats don't support anything in the game, they support a whole lot, and they tell the whole story if you're rational about it.
    I don't blame you, it's not your fault. You are the fan that fantasy football (and the public school system in St. Pete) has created.

    If you want to sleep a little better after a 49-9 lose because Sanchez has a high completion rate, who am I to argue.

    Rock on Philly.

    PS: I am upsetting the fan base? You started this thread, read your fellow Jets fan's comment. They don't need me to get upset.
    Last edited by FF2; 11-27-2012 at 09:37 AM.

  12. #112
    Veteran
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    1,668
    Post Thanks / Like
    And there is no irony lost on the fact that the Jets lost the game by 30 points and turned the ball over 4 times in the game.


    4 turnovers converted into 28 points by the Patriots.

    The Patriots won by 30 points.

    30-28=2 POINTS!



    The point differential in this game without the turnovers was 2 POINTS! The Jets lost at Gillette by 3 POINTS! There is no significant difference between these two teams, they are very very closely matched regardless of what the score was. Hence the Jets were NOT OUTPLAYED, they simply lost the turnover battle. On the other hand the Packers were soundly OUTPLAYED by the Giants and we can infer that if they meet the Giants again in the playoffs they will LOSE. The Jets on the other hand could meet the Patriots in the playoffs and if they can control their turnovers COULD WIN!

    Understand?

  13. #113
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Posts
    52,055
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by billygreen View Post
    And there is no irony lost on the fact that the Jets lost the game by 30 points and turned the ball over 4 times in the game.


    4 turnovers converted into 28 points by the Patriots.

    The Patriots won by 30 points.

    30-28=2 POINTS!




    Patriots lead the entire NFL in forced fumbles.

    They also lead the NFL in a whopping +24 in giveaway/takeaway margin.

    What the hell did you think would happen when that young, aggressive defense played a very undisciplined team?

  14. #114
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    49,680
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by billygreen View Post
    The Jets on the other hand could meet the Patriots in the playoffs and if they can control their turnovers COULD WIN!!
    Mods, please move to Marijuana Cookie thread.

  15. #115
    Veteran
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    1,668
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by PatsFanTX View Post
    Patriots lead the entire NFL in forced fumbles.

    They also lead the NFL in a whopping +24 in giveaway/takeaway margin.

    What the hell did you think would happen when that young, aggressive defense played a very undisciplined team?
    Well I'm glad you've finally admitted that your team did not win it's head-to-head battles with the Jets personnel in the trenches, it won based on an incredible 5-to-4 fumble turnover rate by the Jets and a very bad Sanchez redzone INT. You got ALL the turnovers in the game, which is great, but you did not just line up and beat the Jets head-to-head, which should be concerning for a Pats fans. Yes, YOU have something to be concerned about... not just the Jets, YOU! You are not winning your head-to-head battles, and this is not a good thing for any NFL team. You are winning based on turnovers, and you can't count on that in the long run, that's not how any of those championship Patriots team won in the past. This is a very big problem for the Pats and you've got to admit it.

  16. #116
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    49,680
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by billygreen View Post
    A
    There is no significant difference between these two teams, they are very very closely matched regardless of what the score was.


  17. #117
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    3,016
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by FF2 View Post
    Mods, please move to Marijuana Cookie thread.
    LMAO! Well played.

  18. #118
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Posts
    52,055
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by billygreen View Post
    Well I'm glad you've finally admitted that your team did not win it's head-to-head battles with the Jets personnel in the trenches, it won based on an incredible 5-to-4 fumble turnover rate by the Jets and a very bad Sanchez redzone INT. You got ALL the turnovers in the game, which is great, but you did not just line up and beat the Jets head-to-head, which should be concerning for a Pats fans. Yes, YOU have something to be concerned about... not just the Jets, YOU! You are not winning your head-to-head battles, and this is not a good thing for any NFL team. You are winning based on turnovers, and you can't count on that in the long run, that's not how any of those championship Patriots team won in the past. This is a very big problem for the Pats and you've got to admit it.
    I have to apologize to RahRah and sg3 for claiming them to be delusional.

    This post takes the cake.

  19. #119
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    49,680
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by billygreen View Post
    Well I'm glad you've finally admitted that your team did not win it's head-to-head battles with the Jets personnel in the trenches, it won based on an incredible 5-to-4 fumble turnover rate by the Jets and a very bad Sanchez redzone INT. You got ALL the turnovers in the game, which is great, but you did not just line up and beat the Jets head-to-head, which should be concerning for a Pats fans. Yes, YOU have something to be concerned about... not just the Jets, YOU! You are not winning your head-to-head battles, and this is not a good thing for any NFL team. You are winning based on turnovers, and you can't count on that in the long run, that's not how any of those championship Patriots team won in the past. This is a very big problem for the Pats and you've got to admit it.
    yes, I admit it, the 49-9 over the Jets exposed the weaknesses of the Pats.

    Thank you for pointing this out.

  20. #120
    Veteran
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    1,668
    Post Thanks / Like
    Hey that's fine, you Pats fans wanna show up on the board and rip the Jets go ahead, but you won't be doing it without us ripping your team apart too, and the facts are the facts in this game and the last one between the two teams.

    The point differential without the 4 Jets lost fumbles is only 2 POINTS.

    You won the game before this at Gillette by only 3 POINTS.

    You CAN be beaten by the Jets if the Jets can control their turnovers.



    The truth hurts, and this certainly is the truth.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Us