Mr. WEO
-
Posts
47,531 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Mr. WEO
-
-
could be an HOA thing or something?
That's quite a harsh HOA! 138K probably 1/3 of the value of the unit.
-
"have you ever used a balm before? do you even know what's in a balm?"
-
How dare Dungy make such a ridiculous statement?!?! Vick served his time in prison and should be able to live it up for his 30th birthday if he wants to. Cover charge or no cover charge.
Wasn't Dungy suspended from the League for robbing the Colts of a couple of SBs?
-
Excellent point, because the only thing that changed between those two seasons was the addition of TO.
Another great point, after all, Oakland still sucked with Randy Moss proving once and for all that he was a washed up nobody.
Nope. Obviously it didn't prove that at all. Moss was clearly dogging it in Oakland. Also, he was in the middle of his career, not at the tail end. If you are saying that TO was similarly dogging it in Buff, I might otherwise agree with your comparison. But I'm betting that's not what you're saying about TO, so the comparison isn't valid.
-
Excellent point, because the only thing that changed between those two seasons was the addition of TO.
Neither offense was any good, for many reasons others have listed.
However, given the output they no doubt dissected to the tiniest detail, Nix and CG obviously didn't see any value in keeping TO.
-
TO got more passes thrown to him. Why do you suppose this is?
And as I pointed out to you long ago, when you fire your OC and LT just before the season starts, not to mention have up to 4 rookie or first-time starters on your O-line, you won't do well no matter what. And those had nothing to do with TO.
Yes, firing the awful OC (from '08) and releasing the "starting LT"--who was actually the erstwhile RT--had nothing to do with TO.
However, my origianl argument was that, knowing all that, the much ballyhooed hiring of TO (and all of the great happenings that were going to happen as a result) came to nothing. He came and went and didn't make a dent. No spin can change this.
-
Suppose TO's NFL career started 3 years ago, and all the antics that earned his reputation happened in another league far away from the media.
You mean the NHL?
His defense is that his recent character would not be an issue with a team, but the media hype about his character creates the problem.I'm not buying this. Look, he can't claim on one hand that owners in the league know he actually is of good character, and at the same time balme the media for negatively influencing those same owners about his character. Besides, these teams aren't avoiding signing TO because of what they read in the papers--come on! If they thought he had value (like Ralph hoped last year), they would pick him up in a second. In fact, there was so little to talk about regarding TOs antics last season, every team is passing on him because of what they saw on the field compared (his value) compared to his ridiculous asking price.
He's totally deluded as to his actual situation.
-
I said a dozen or so posts ago that what Jerruh said and did or didn't do has no bearing on anything. And frankly I don't care what he said about Gailey, other than the fact that he said it and obviously meant it.
I like that part the best--so confused, yet so succinct--it summarizes your all-over-the-place argument.
Again, who cares about the boosters? Gailey knew that if he didn't get the job he wanted in the NFL, he could return, and if fired, would pocket $4M. Which he did. The horror!Wait, are you claiming that a person who receives interview offers, can't choose where to accept them or not? Please tell me you're not saying this.
Why didn't the Bills interview Gailey back in 2006? Because he didn't want to interview with them?
Really---what Div I college coach even cares about the boosters? Good point! Things were going great at GT!
No, don't worry, I'm not saying that. I am clearly saying that NFL owners chose who will interview for HC positions-not the other way around, as you claim (bizarre). A potential HC candidate is, of course, free to decline an offer of an interview, but you have not provided any evidence that CG did so regarding the Cowboys.
So CG decided against interviewing with the Bills in '06?? Well, if they had actually invited him, maybe that would be an interesting claim.
-
As I showed above doc, TO got less than a pass and a half more throws per game, not the "majority of passes" that you made up. And with all the drops by TO, you'd think that Evans would have out-received him. Didn't happen. Not to mention TO had a higher YPC average (obviously because all the passes were being thrown to him).
Beyond that, the Bills passed the ball the 2nd fewest times in the NFL last year. As a fr'instane, they passed it over a 100 times fewer than the Cowboys did in 2008, when TO was targeted 139 times. Multiplying 139 by his 2009 52.4% catch rate, you get 73 catches, times 15.1 YPC is 1,102 yards.
So you see, the Bills had a lousy offensive scheme and lousy QB'ing, something you'd have to agree with, since you say "it's all about the QB." But carry-on with your TO fetish.
Sorry, the "plurality of passes". Better?
Bottom line, as I pointed out long ago: without TO, Bills passed for 3302 yards in '08. Evans had 1017, Reed 597 and Parrish 232. Royal had 351. With TO in '09, 2789 yards passing TO 829, Evans 612, Reed 291, Roscoe 34. Evans Reed and Parrish saw their numbers shifted to TO. Net result, overall passing game was worse in '09.
Fetish, huh? I just thought the article was funny as it validates what many have always felt about TO. You actually pine for the guy still.
-
Sigh. If only it were that simple.
Now you're starting to catch-on. So to speak.
Yes, if only---but you brought it up.
It will all be come self evident when another receiver catches more passes than anyone else on the team this season. Seems to happen every year, doc.
-
No, he didn't interview because he didn't want them. Because he wasn't desperate, like you laughably claim. Despite those big, bad GT boosters!
You're the one who is hooked on what JJ thinks!! YOu won't stop referring to it in fact. WTF?? hahahaha
Those big bad boosters tossed him out less than 12 months later---he knew what was coming, doc. You don't seem too clear on this.
The best part about your goofy rant is that you are under the impression that HC candidates in the NFL "chose" to interview by putting their name on a sign up sheet outside of the door of a team's front office.
Guess CG, by "signing up" to interview with the Steelers and the Fins, picked the only 2 teams that didn't want him--what a strange strategy!! But hey, he had that great job at GT, and 2 more seasons left on his contract, while he picked the next NFL teams to interview with, right
Tell me again why he didn't interview with the Bills before they picked DJ?
-
Someone also always has to throw the passes. I guess we don't need to worry about the Bills' QB anymore.
Yes, someone has to throw those passes. Very good.
No, the QB problem is not solved, nor was it when the majority of passes was temporarily shifted to TO.
-
Again, Gailey was SO desperate to get back into the NFL, feeling his HC'ing mortality with every breath, that he didn't interview with SEVEN other teams looking for a HC? And the Dols and Steelers (who again were coincidentally 2 teams that didn't fire him, while Jerruh did) were "courtesy" interviews, but Jerruh wouldn't extend the same to Gailey, a guy to whom he "tossed out a compliment" in which he admits he was wrong in firing him the first time. No doc, there is need for me to prove anything further. You've unwittingly done it for me.
Why didn't he interview with seven other teams? Hmmmmmm....that's a mind bender. Oh, wait---they didn't ask him to!
Yes, that's right--the two teams that didn't fire him did him the courtesy of an interview, despite having no intention of hiring him. The team that DID fire him, DIDN'T interview him.
See? You've finally figured it all out! Glad I could help.
-
Someone had to catch those passes.
Someone always catches the passes, doc.
-
He spends half the article saying that NFL teams have no problem with his character, yet blames the media for his unemployment--because they disparage his character.
He's not very bright.
-
Fair enough doc. If you can find a quote by Jerruh where he said he didn't want to interview Gailey, I'll admit you win. In the (indefinite) meantime, I'll take the far more believable position that Gailey had been there/done that and didn't want to go through "that" all over again.
You lost the CBA argument years ago, doc. I just keep hammering you on it because you are obviously a masochist. But I used it to make a point that Jerruh doesn't casually "toss out" mea culpas like you fancy he does.
You want me to prove JJ didn't call up CG??? Why (or how) would I do that?? Look, no where does it say that any of the 10 guys invited for interviews included CG. No where does it say that JJ claims CG turned down an interview.
YOU claim he did so---you prove it. You claimed he wasn't looking for an NFL HC job when you first claimed that CG didn't want to coach the Cowboys. When that proved to be factually incorrect, you made up your tortured "hot girl" analogy. When that didn't work, you simply declared that you felt "it was far more believable" that he would pass up a job with the Cowboys (and what might be his last chance to coach in the NFL) so he could return to the disgruntled boosters in Georgia Tech. Yeah, I could see why you would find that "far more believable"!
Keep it coming man!
-
Yeah, Jerruh is in the habit of admitting mistakes, especially when "tossing off" unsolicited compliments of past head coaches. Where do you get this stuff?
Then again, maybe Gailey had a gun to Jerruh's head when he said it? Or maybe Gailey is dying and Jerruh felt he had to say something really nice, to the point of making himself look like a fool? You think maybe one day he'll admit he !@#$ed-up the 2006 CBA? Yeah, that's the ticket.
Jerruh probably wanted to interview Gailey but Gailey told him to take a hike. There are 31 other "pretty hot chicks" out there, so no need to go back with one you know is crazy and who dumped you for no good reason the first time around. Money doesn't buy happiness. Obviously.
Miami hired Parcells, who hired his own guy. The Steelers went with someone who had never worked for the organization before and who wasn't recommended by Cowher. Nothing to see here, move along.
The bolded parts sum up my response.
Also, nothing screams "white flag" more than tossing in the CBA.
-
How can one "make a jump" if they haven't "show growth"? That's nonsense. Even if everyone else declined and his standing improved, you wouldn't use the term "made a jump". You are playing a stupid semantic game here to try to win an argument. It's clear Chan thinks he has improved, which is really the point of saying he has "shown growth" or "made a jump".
You are correct if you are saying this may mean squat. But don't deny what the HC said. He said it.
Showing growth would refer to past performance (that doesn't mean OTA's, I would think) compared to present. Making a jump means he's no longer on the bottom of the depth chart.
-
This is a retread. Quoting the Shmuck article.
Boy, if they use a pick on this guy, all the "we're building through the draft" guys will hemorrhage into thier toilet bowls.
-
Poz is a solid fooball player and should thrive in the 3-4. Bills are going into this season with the best linebacking corp in years.
Whoa! Really??
-
As an interviewee, you also can decide where you want to interview, and if offered a job, whether you want to take it. It's not some major coincidence that Gailey only interviewed with NFL teams with whom he'd worked and who didn't fire him. Again my hot/crazy ex-girlfriend analogy fits Jerruh and the Cowboys to a T. Sounds good in theory, but somewhere in the world, someone is already sick of his/her spit.
Bill Cowher most certainly didn't recommend that the Steelers hire Tomlin. And even if he didn't recommend Gailey, he most certainly would have recommended Whisenhunt, yet the Steelers went with Tomlin. Obviously what Cowher said to them wasn't that important.
But I'm still curious as to why you think Jones lied when he said that his firing of Gailey was a mistake? Not that his word means anything. Just wondering why Jerruh would lie like that?
But Jones still meant it, otherwise he wouldn't have said it.Do you still want me to answer this question?--seems you answered it yourself.
Jones tossed off a compliment to Gailey, big deal. When there came to correct this "biggest mistake", Jones didn't even interview the guy. Why can't you understand this. He wasn't asked to interview.
The two interviews Gailey got were obviously courtesy interviews, as both the Steelers (even with Cowher's endorsement) and the Fins were very familiar with Gailey's work and passed in favor of two guys with zero HC experience. You're chosing to ignore this inconvenient truth. Go figure......
And your analogy (hot girlfriend) is, as usual, misused. It would be more accurate to describe it as there are only 32 girls on the planet. A guy with Chan Gailey's level of attraction doesn't turn down a date with one of the hottest of the 32, just becuase she dumped him once--especially if she is rich and begging him to come back. It would never happen that way. You're stuck with stating, ridiculously, the contrary so.... nothing I can do to help you.
-
Simple, yes. But when he doesn't interview for the SEVEN other vacant head coaching jobs, he's not exactly "desperate" to get out of GT, is he? Hell the Bills were looking for a coach, but didn't interview him, and settled on Jauron. Was that because the Bills refused, or he did?
As for the Steelers not hiring Gailey, they didn't even hire one of their own coordinators, who helped them win a SB. And I doubt Cowher told them "hire Mike Tomlin." So that's also proof of nothing.
Interviewing for an NFL job isn't something you sign up for. It requires an invitation. Come on doc!
The Bills weren't doing around saying what a huge mistake it was for the Cowboys to fire CG, either--see the difference?
Not sure if Cowher said hire Tomlin--hard to imagine they didn't seek Cowher's blessing/advice. But he certainly did not say hire CG, did he---despite his claims that he would do so when the Bills picked him.
Jones and Cowher didn't want him when they had he chance to hire or support the hiring of CG.
-
Hard to believe that a team that is well run as the Steelers did not fall down rushing to make Gailey (one of tis own) its head coach after Bill Cowher personally recommended they he take over.
Probably a good thing that Whaley, with his insider Steeler knowledge, was hired after they hired Gailey as the HC, or Chan still might be unemployed
Yeah, hard to figure that one too. Guess Gailey turned down that job also.
-
nothing wrong with a guy making his case. I like the confidence.
Poor TO
in The Stadium Wall Archives
Posted
No, never said TO was "the cause of all the problems". You simply made that up--"what a shocker there!". This is what you do. My point was clear--TO=no impact for the money and hype. You have chosen not to directly dispute this.
Wow, the old Powerball line again, eh? As for Schonert--we've been over this. He was the architect of a crappy offense the prior year. And Walker was an insanely overpaid RT who absolutely hated the idea of having to play LT. So stop spinning.
Actually, after Moss left, the Raiders had nearly the exact same number of catches/yards the next season, so yes, we are correct--someone else caught that crappy amount of passes (the great Ron Curry filled in nicely). However, the year prior, before Moss put on the dog, the passing game had 1000 yards more and 50 more catches. So Moss could simply turn it on or off, as he wished. TO did no such thing in Buff. His year was akin to Moss's "I don't want to play hard for this team year".
The other difference which even you can't deny, is that at least one other team was willing to trade for Moss--even after he blatanly dogged it. TO, on the other hand, got a sniff from Cincy and is now reduced to crying to the press about......the press.