Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Bob in STL said:

Nice, so your here to enlighten others. Great.  
 

My experience is that people who call other people names are not very enlightened.  

Or to be enlightened.

 

Typical of our society today.  Where did I call you a name in this thread.  I haven't.  People who fire false accusations are not very enlightened.

Edited by formerlyofCtown
Posted
45 minutes ago, formerlyofCtown said:

Or to be enlightened.

 

Typical of our society today.  Where did I call you a name in this thread.  I haven't.  People who fire false accusations are not very enlightened.

See below. 
 

   3 hours ago,  Bob in STL said: 

I know he got an unsportsmanlike flag. That was all I recall of the Zimster 

You almost offered something of substance there at least.  Instead of a lame😃

Posted (edited)
19 minutes ago, Bob in STL said:

See below. 
 

   3 hours ago,  Bob in STL said: 

I know he got an unsportsmanlike flag. That was all I recall of the Zimster 

You almost offered something of substance there at least.  Instead of a lame😃

That's not calling you a name there guy.  I was referring to the emoji reply you left on my post when I didn't offer anything humorous.  Unless you are referring to yourself.

 

So where is this name I called you.

Edited by formerlyofCtown
Posted
25 minutes ago, formerlyofCtown said:

That's not calling you a name there guy.  I was referring to the emoji reply you left on my post when I didn't offer anything humorous.  Unless you are referring to yourself.

 

So where is this name I called you.

I guess I found humor in what you said.  I don’t wish to debate the laughing emoji. 
 

Therefore, you are the first and only on my ignore list.  Cheers. 

Posted
Just now, Bob in STL said:

I guess I found humor in what you said.  I don’t wish to debate the laughing emoji. 
 

Therefore, you are the first and only on my ignore list.  Cheers. 

Sorry if I misunderstood. Not exactly sure but if I was on your ignore list I don't think I'd be seeing this post.

Posted (edited)

He played very good today.

 

Is he good enough to be a starter from now on? Maybe.

 

He has made a strong case that he should continue to be on the active roster.

Edited by Mark Vader
Posted

Probably a better option than Norman. Would like to see more before crowning him over Levi. Great point by Joe B., I think we'll see more of him regardless.

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted
6 hours ago, HappyDays said:

 

I said it in the game thread too - he reminded me of EJ Gaines today.

 

I didn't see Dane Jackson get hurt today. 🤔

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Haha (+1) 1
Posted
1 hour ago, Ed_Formerly_of_Roch said:

 

For a person who doesn't follow the combine or stats that closely, is that a good or bad time?  I'm assuming bad?

It's definitely below average but it's better than Wallace or Norman

Posted
6 hours ago, Warcodered said:

I'd like to see how people thought he did on all-22 film before I crown him.

 

Me too.  

Cam also had a very good game vs Titans. 

2 good young cb's, hungry and seem to play fast.  

Posted
12 hours ago, TheProcess said:

Showed promise, but was one game...against the Jets. I’d like Levi to take the spot back when he comes off IR. Hopefully this week. 

and Jackson could move to the slot where Johnson has been brutal.

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted
13 hours ago, JerseyBills said:

Gotta look at the ALL 22

Don't just dismiss Levi as a JAG

Norman , I understand but not Levi

 

With that being said,  the rookie showed alot of promise today!!

They say 1st INT by Bills secondary,  didn't Levi snag one in weeks 1 or 2?

Yeah I kept hearing that too. 

 

Levi absolutely had a pick against the Rams.

Posted

I'd swear there was a thread just like this about 3 weeks ago, only difference was in the title replace the name Dane Jackson with Josh Norman.  Even three years ago when Wallace came out of nowhere there likely was a thread then promoting him to be the starter.

 

While Jackson did play very well and deserves more playing time, I'm a little reserved yet at this point.  But do agree that he looked good out there, certainly didn't appear to lose anything.  Jackson's play was also likely helped by the fact we had six sacks too so were getting to the QB.  Six sacks I believe is more than we had in the past 3 or 4 games combined.

×
×
  • Create New...