nerdmann
13 years ago

He just made it up out of thin air, like when he said that Ryan Grant doesn't work on pass blocking. Jones went over the middle a lot in his first couple years, until the coaches realized that he was even more effective running sideline routes. I guess some fans just can't handle having four or five really good wide receivers on their team.

Originally Posted by: Greg C. 




1: I did not make this up, see my response two posts ago. On the contrary.
2: I also did not say that Ryan Grant "doesn't work on pass blocking." What I stated was that they attempted to make every one of the RBs in training camp into the "designated pass pro" dude. EXCEPT Grant. Now you believe this is because Grant is "the starter." I merely suggested maybe it's because he's not awesome at that.
3: Since we're calling for evidence for every single claim that is stated on this board, do you have any empirical data to suggest that "the coaches realized he was even more effective running sideline routes?" Also, by "more effective," do you mean "drops fewer passes" along the sideline than over the middle? Because when we talk about going "over the middle," we generally mean short to intermediate distance. This is considered more dangerous, because you are most likely to get hammered by LBs making catches over the middle. Now, given that it's generally the "over the shoulder" catches that JJ has problems with, it seems to me that he would be BETTER on those crossing patterns over the middle, then he would be streaking down the sidelines, or even going deep over the middle.
Furthermore, given JJ's bulk and his larger frame, it would seem that he has the size and strength to take those types of hits going over the middle, better than smaller, lankier guys like say Donald Driver. Not to mention the fact that he is a decade younger. However, if you do provide evidence that "the coaches realized that he was even more effective running sideline routes" then I will defer to said evidence. Thanks.
4: As evad would say, what are you talking about in your last sentence? Some fans can't handle having 4 or 5 really good WRs on our team? I haven't heard anyone say they have a problem with that. Perhaps you could clarify.

“Winning is not a sometime thing, it is an all the time thing. You don't do things right once in a while…you do them right all the time.”
nerdmann
13 years ago

I don't know (or care) what Nerd would do in this situation, But I saw what Jones did do.

He pledged to donate $500 to the House of Hope for every TD Jennings gets this year. Jennings pledged $1000 for each one. They both pledged $3000 if they get a TD in the Super Bowl.

They did a lot more talking to fans than they did the media.

I didn't hear Jones say he wouldn't go over the middle once the whole night.

Originally Posted by: Dexter_Sinister 




Who claimed JJ said he wouldn't go over the middle? In case you weren't following along, JJ bitched to the media that he wasn't involved enough in the offense. Is this another non-sequitur or are you just happy to see me?
I guess it's true what they say. Bitches tend to synchronize their cycles and end up PMSing all at the same time. Good thing I'm here to dish out the midol. xoxo
“Winning is not a sometime thing, it is an all the time thing. You don't do things right once in a while…you do them right all the time.”
evad04
13 years ago


Then pack93z insinuated that I was suggesting that JJ show this willingness in a press interview. This is a good example of the common non-sequiturs which are used by many pissy little shebitches on this forum when they cannot successfully win an argument on it's merits.

...

Do I know for a fact that he is a chickenshit to go over the middle? I have no idea.

Originally Posted by: nerdmann 


I don't know whether you mean a) the non-sequitur came from me being confused by your post (which is all cleared up now thanks to your brilliant practice-boasting suggestions) or b) that Pack93z is the "pissy little shebitch" who employed the tactics of misdirection because he couldn't beat your "argument" (ahem, your unsubstantiated opinion). If it's me that's the non-sequitur pissy shebitch, I can live. If Pack is the ... you know ... then you really need to get your head looked at. I feign credibility; he's got the real thing.


And not that you give a crap, but I'm not impressed at a wall of text mostly dedicated to clearing up a miscommunication -- one which originally grew from your "argument" which was full of implications. The rest of your whiskey-spun delusion about how Jones can impress the coaches is thought provoking in its own right -- I'll have to let it marinate. I think it lacks some panache, though. Why not write a screenplay and really push the envelope? I mean, you know, something edgy but also with a hero story. Like Any Given Sunday meets Rudy. Maybe James Jones was picked on as a kid, and you can work that into how his practice field braggadocio gave him newfound confidence. We should discuss his at length because I'd really love to get inside your head (no homo).

I'l go further and add while you have no idea (your own words) for a fact that JJ is chicken shit to go over the middle, you also have no basis for the thought in the first place (outside of your mental diarrhea, which I'd see a doctor about).

And clearly JJ's drops worried the Packers enough to give him a new contract. 😉 Have a great night nerd, and thanks for always giving me something to laugh at.

William Henderson didn't have to run people over. His preferred method was levitation.
"I'm a reasonable man, get off my case."
Silentio
13 years ago

Who claimed JJ said he wouldn't go over the middle? In case you weren't following along, JJ bitched to the media that he wasn't involved enough in the offense. Is this another non-sequitur or are you just happy to see me?
I guess it's true what they say. Bitches tend to synchronize their cycles and end up PMSing all at the same time. Good thing I'm here to dish out the midol. xoxo

Originally Posted by: nerdmann 



Wow. Nerdmann with the misogyny. You go, girl.

As far as Jones “bitching” goes, here’s some empirical evidence.

Kevin Seifert on James Jones :

Jones said he had no issue with quarterback Aaron Rodgers' selection of targets. But Jones made clear he wasn't thrilled that he played 19 snaps



Jones himself:

"I don't care about the ball at all, but I truly, truly want to be in the game plan. Everybody plays this game because they want to play. I'm not selfish; I understand we've got a lot of weapons, so I'm not saying I want the ball every play. But I think I deserve to be on the field more than I was."



Mind you, Jones didn’t tweet this opinion or post it on his blog. He didn’t run up to a group of reporters and say, “Hey guys, lemme tell ya how pissed off I am to be playing in Green Bay and not getting balls thrown my way.” He stated that he’s not unhappy that he didn’t get the ball, but that he wants to be as fully involved in the game plan as possible. He wants to contribute to the team and he thinks he deserves to be on the field. He has a desire to be on the field even when he isn’t necessarily going to get the ball. This isn’t Randy Moss we’re talking about, guys, it’s a guy who wants to be involved whether or not he’s going to be the super star of the game. Under what set of circumstances is this “bitching?"
blank
evad04
13 years ago

Who claimed JJ said he wouldn't go over the middle?

Originally Posted by: nerdmann 


You can't expect us to keep up with your head, dude.

Pack asks: What is reaction to only getting one ball thrown your way and a handful of meaningful snaps?

You respond with the three-pronged approach of cashing your check, working on the over the shoulder catches, and demonstrate willingness to go over the middle regularly.

Now, ignoring the apparent snafu/confusion over what role interviews had in showing willingness (that's all clear now) the implication still remained that Jones must be showing an unwillingness to go over the middle. THAT is the part where I scratch my head and ponder, "Where does he come up with..."

Now, were I versed in telepathy I'd have known that you admit to not knowing for a "fact" that he shows unwillingness, but that it's part of your theory. But when someone subsequently addresses this "willingness" business, you'd do well not to get defensive and offer "Who said JJ claimed he wouldn't go over the middle?" What the shit man, no one said it, but you insinuated it.

But seriously, PM me or something and we can start working on the James Jones screenplay. There's a lot more fiction that can be invented, and I think you're just the guy for the job.

(Counting down until Dakota comes in and accuses me of hive mentality)
William Henderson didn't have to run people over. His preferred method was levitation.
"I'm a reasonable man, get off my case."
RaiderPride
13 years ago
This was once a fine read with interesting feed back.

It is always the same people, in game day chat, or here in the regular forum that have to be the center of attention by being over the top, purposely being controversial and really trying to piss off main stream posters.

They post to get a reaction. They live for it. They feel some sort of perverse, perhaps sexually related satisfaction by being a jerk off. (Which they may indeed be doing during their center of attraction moment typing on a thread like this.)

God help them. Let's all hope these people are not teachers of our children, or working in summer camps for children.

There is truly something wrong with people who live for being disruptive and who beg for an argument and a reaction.

Kevin this thread... It has become sad. The Packers are coming off a huge win right after a Superbowl Championship.










""People Will Probably Never Remember What You Said, And May Never Remember What You Did. However, People Will Always Remember How You Made Them Feel."
Silentio
13 years ago
RaiderPride, I love this post. An applaud for you, sir. The image of Nerdmann sitting with a netbook on his lap, internet explorer open to Packers Home, furiously masturbating with one hand while writing posts to piss off evad with the other -- that’s some funny shit.
blank
RaiderPride
13 years ago

RaiderPride, I love this post. An applaud for you, sir. The image of Nerdmann sitting with a netbook on his lap, internet explorer open to Packers Home, furiously masturbating with one hand while writing posts to piss off evad with the other -- that’s some funny shit.

Originally Posted by: Silentio 



Let's be perfectly clear here.

I did not mention anyone by name.. For all you know I may have been pointing out anyone who posted in this thread. Based on my "OPINION"
""People Will Probably Never Remember What You Said, And May Never Remember What You Did. However, People Will Always Remember How You Made Them Feel."
Silentio
13 years ago

Let's be perfectly clear here.

I did not mention anyone by name.. For all you know I may have been pointing out anyone who posted in this thread. Based on my "OPINION"

Originally Posted by: RaiderPride 



Oh, I know. But I choose to think you were talking about nerdmann.
blank
mi_keys
13 years ago

This is a good example of the common non-sequiturs which are used by many pissy little shebitches on this forum when they cannot successfully win an argument on it's merits.

Originally Posted by: nerdmann 



[roflmao] [roflmao] [roflmao] [roflmao] [roflmao] [roflmao] [roflmao] [roflmao] [roflmao] [roflmao] [roflmao] [roflmao] [roflmao] [roflmao] [roflmao] [roflmao] [roflmao] [roflmao]

...stop, I can't breath.
Born and bred a cheesehead
Fan Shout
beast (10m) : If we win tonight the game is still relative in terms of 5th, 6th or 7th seed... win and it's 5th or 6th, lose and it's 6th or 7th
beast (11m) : Mucky, I thought the ad revenue went to the broadcasting companies or the NFL, at least not directly
Zero2Cool (21m) : I think the revenue share is moot, isn't it? That's the CBA an Salary Cap handling that.
bboystyle (33m) : i mean game becomes irrelevant if we win tonight. Just a game where we are trying to play spoilers to Vikings chance at the #1 seed
Mucky Tundra (42m) : beast, I would guess ad revenue from more eyes watching tv
Zero2Cool (1h) : I would think it would hurt the home team because people would have to cancel last minute maybe? i dunno
beast (1h) : I agree that it's BS for fans planning on going to the game. But how does it bring in more money? I'm guessing indirectly?
packerfanoutwest (1h) : bs on flexing the game....they do it for the $$league$$, not the hometown fans
Zero2Cool (2h) : I see what you did there Mucky
Zero2Cool (2h) : dammit. 3:25pm
Zero2Cool (2h) : Packers Vikings flexed to 3:35pm
Mucky Tundra (2h) : Upon receiving the news about Luke Musgrave, I immediately fell to the ground
Mucky Tundra (2h) : Yeah baby!
Zero2Cool (2h) : LUKE MUSGRAVE PLAYING TONIGHT~!~~~~WOWHOAAOHAOAA yah
Zero2Cool (3h) : I wanna kill new QB's ... blitz the crap out of them.
beast (3h) : Barry seemed to get too conservative against new QBs, Hafley doesn't have that issue
Zero2Cool (4h) : However, we seem to struggle vs new QB's
Zero2Cool (4h) : Should be moot point, cuz Packers should win tonight.
packerfanoutwest (4h) : ok I stand corrected
Zero2Cool (5h) : Ok, yes, you are right. I see that now how they get 7th
Zero2Cool (5h) : 5th - Packers win out, Vikings lose out. Maybe?
beast (5h) : Saying no to the 6th lock.
beast (5h) : No, with the Commanders beating the Eagles, Packers could have a good chance of 6th or 7th unless the win out
Zero2Cool (5h) : I think if Packers win, they are locked 6th with chance for 5th.
beast (5h) : But it doesn't matter, as the Packers win surely win one of their remaining games
beast (5h) : This is not complex, just someone doesn't want to believe reality
beast (5h) : We already have told you... if Packers lose all their games (they won't, but if they did), and Buccaneers and Falcons win all theirs
Zero2Cool (5h) : I posted it in that Packers and 1 seed thread
Zero2Cool (5h) : I literally just said it.
packerfanoutwest (5h) : show us a scenario where Pack don't get in? bet you can't
Zero2Cool (5h) : Falcons, Buccaneers would need to win final two games.
Zero2Cool (5h) : Yes, if they win one of three, they are lock. If they lose out, they can be eliminated.
packerfanoutwest (5h) : as I just said,,gtheyh are in no matter what
Zero2Cool (5h) : Packers should get in. I just hope it's not 7th seed. Feels dirty.
packerfanoutwest (5h) : If packers lose out, no matter what, they are in
packerfanoutwest (5h) : both teams can not male the playoffs....falcon hold the tie breaker
packerfanoutwest (5h) : if bucs win out they win their division
beast (5h) : Fine, Buccaneers and Falcons can get ahead of us
packerfanoutwest (5h) : falcons are already ahead of us
beast (5h) : Packers will get in
beast (5h) : If Packers lose the rest of their games and Falcons win the rest of theirs, they could pass us... but not gonna happen
packerfanoutwest (6h) : they still are in the playoffs
packerfanoutwest (6h) : If Packers lose the remaining games,,,,at 10-7
Zero2Cool (7h) : We can say it. We don't play.
Mucky Tundra (8h) : But to say they are in is looking past the Saints
Mucky Tundra (9h) : That said, their odds are very favorable with a >99% chance of making the playoffs entering this week's games
Mucky Tundra (9h) : Packers are not in and have not clinched a playoff spot.
buckeyepackfan (9h) : Packers are in, they need to keep winning to improve their seed#.
Mucky Tundra (18h) : Getting help would have been nice, but helping ourselves should always be the plan
beast (19h) : Too bad Seahawks couldn't beat Vikings
Please sign in to use Fan Shout
2024 Packers Schedule
Friday, Sep 6 @ 7:15 PM
Eagles
Sunday, Sep 15 @ 12:00 PM
COLTS
Sunday, Sep 22 @ 12:00 PM
Titans
Sunday, Sep 29 @ 12:00 PM
VIKINGS
Sunday, Oct 6 @ 3:25 PM
Rams
Sunday, Oct 13 @ 12:00 PM
CARDINALS
Sunday, Oct 20 @ 12:00 PM
TEXANS
Sunday, Oct 27 @ 12:00 PM
Jaguars
Sunday, Nov 3 @ 3:25 PM
LIONS
Sunday, Nov 17 @ 12:00 PM
Bears
Sunday, Nov 24 @ 3:25 PM
49ERS
Thursday, Nov 28 @ 7:20 PM
DOLPHINS
Thursday, Dec 5 @ 7:15 PM
Lions
Sunday, Dec 15 @ 7:20 PM
Seahawks
Monday, Dec 23 @ 7:15 PM
SAINTS
Sunday, Dec 29 @ 3:25 PM
Vikings
Saturday, Jan 4 @ 11:00 PM
BEARS
Recent Topics
32m / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

1h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

3h / Random Babble / Martha Careful

22-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / packerfanoutwest

19-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

19-Dec / Random Babble / Zero2Cool

18-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

17-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

17-Dec / Featured Content / Zero2Cool

16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

16-Dec / Feedback, Suggestions and Issues / Mucky Tundra

16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

Headlines
Copyright © 2006 - 2024 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.