C.Biscuit97 Posted October 17, 2006 Posted October 17, 2006 His record is 2-0 ... the Cardinals are 1-5 He played the best he could have possibly played. His team let him down. 807451[/snapback] No, it's 0-2. Perhaps if his coach thought he was special, he would have trusted him more at the end of the game instead of settling for a field goal. Does Losman get credit for a win in Miami last year and Mularkey get credit for the loss because of horrible playcalling? Sorry, the NFL doesn't work like that. You are what you are and Losman and Leinart are both 2 games under .500. Except JP has two wins.
BoondckCL Posted October 17, 2006 Posted October 17, 2006 No, it's 0-2. Perhaps if his coach thought he was special, he would have trusted him more at the end of the game instead of settling for a field goal. Does Losman get credit for a win in Miami last year and Mularkey get credit for the loss because of horrible playcalling? Sorry, the NFL doesn't work like that. You are what you are and Losman and Leinart are both 2 games under .500. Except JP has two wins. 807460[/snapback] Great reply.
C.Biscuit97 Posted October 17, 2006 Posted October 17, 2006 No it was a seperate question completely. I wasn't saying that i wanted Leinart, I was just asking, would you prefer Ron Mexico on our team and us winning, or a guy who doesn't have "it" and losing. That's right, i am trying to confuse the hell out of everyone to stop stupid threads like this one by chaning the meaning of "it". 807453[/snapback] Ha, well you did a good job. I'm a little buzzed but all I know is I just prefer anyone that wins football games. Bottom line. People have "it" the second they go to the playoffs and win some meaningful game. JP, Rivers, Smith, Leinart aren't close to having "it" yet.
BoondckCL Posted October 17, 2006 Posted October 17, 2006 Ha, well you did a good job. I'm a little buzzed but all I know is I just prefer anyone that wins football games. Bottom line. People have "it" the second they go to the playoffs and win some meaningful game. JP, Rivers, Smith, Leinart aren't close to having "it" yet. 807463[/snapback] Now herpes or "it" "it"?
C.Biscuit97 Posted October 17, 2006 Posted October 17, 2006 Now herpes or "it" "it"? 807464[/snapback] The herpes "it" is bad I believe. So the non-sore "it."
BoondckCL Posted October 17, 2006 Posted October 17, 2006 The herpes "it" is bad I believe. So the non-sore "it." 807466[/snapback] Roger that. But hopefully if Losman gets or has "it", it spreads like the other it to the rest of the team.
Acantha Posted October 17, 2006 Posted October 17, 2006 I'm not sure I agree with you there, buddy. I watched John Elway play, and I saw him have a lot of 7-9 and 8-8 type seasons. But despite that mediocre win/loss record, it was clear as day Elway had "it." 807459[/snapback] So it is nothing more than talent then? Yes, there are more talented players in the leauge. That has nothing to do with some mystical "it".
BoondckCL Posted October 17, 2006 Posted October 17, 2006 So it is nothing more than talent then? Yes, there are more talented players in the leauge. That has nothing to do with some mystical "it". 807472[/snapback] I ask you this...Is "it" Kwom?
daquixers_is_back Posted October 17, 2006 Posted October 17, 2006 No, it's 0-2. Perhaps if his coach thought he was special, he would have trusted him more at the end of the game instead of settling for a field goal. Does Losman get credit for a win in Miami last year and Mularkey get credit for the loss because of horrible playcalling? Sorry, the NFL doesn't work like that. You are what you are and Losman and Leinart are both 2 games under .500. Except JP has two wins. 807460[/snapback] In my opinion yes ... you as a player simply have to give all you can and play the best you can. Leinart played a near perfect game. He did the best he could. He as a player WON his aspect of the game. The team lost their aspect of the game (more like Neil Rackers). Such as have you heard people say you need 2 out of 3 to win the game? Defense, offense, special teams. Only 2 units need to win for you to win. Leinart won his aspect.
Alaska Darin Posted October 17, 2006 Posted October 17, 2006 In my opinion yes ... you as a player simply have to give all you can and play the best you can. Leinart played a near perfect game. He did the best he could. He as a player WON his aspect of the game. The team lost their aspect of the game (more like Neil Rackers). Such as have you heard people say you need 2 out of 3 to win the game? Defense, offense, special teams. Only 2 units need to win for you to win. Leinart won his aspect. 807496[/snapback] Really?
cåblelady Posted October 17, 2006 Posted October 17, 2006 Really? 807501[/snapback] You're "it". I quit.
DeLuca1967 Posted October 17, 2006 Posted October 17, 2006 In my opinion yes ... you as a player simply have to give all you can and play the best you can. Leinart played a near perfect game. He did the best he could. He as a player WON his aspect of the game. The team lost their aspect of the game (more like Neil Rackers). Such as have you heard people say you need 2 out of 3 to win the game? Defense, offense, special teams. Only 2 units need to win for you to win. Leinart won his aspect. 807496[/snapback] Leinart did show more in one game than JP Losman has shown in three years. He played well against a good team. He gave his team a chance to win the game. Leinart is going to give the Cardinals a chance to win many games in the future, if he stays healthy. I don't get that feeling with Losman. I don't know how many seasons it will take until the Bills are good again. I do know that Losman will not be the QB at that time and Levy will not be the faux-GM.
nick in* england Posted October 17, 2006 Posted October 17, 2006 Is the question "Supercalorfrajilistic is a very long word - how do you spell it?"
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted October 17, 2006 Posted October 17, 2006 His record is 2-0 ... the Cardinals are 1-5 He played the best he could have possibly played. His team let him down. 807451[/snapback] No, he's 0-2. If you're gonna go there, then we can EASILY say JP is 4-2 this year.
kegtapr Posted October 17, 2006 Posted October 17, 2006 I think this post may have just convinced me to never read the football portion of the wall again.
Ramius Posted October 17, 2006 Posted October 17, 2006 Some players seem to have "It", while most don't. Watching Leinert tonight he seems to have that thing simply refered to as "It". The natural ability to make things happen. The first time I watched Jim Kelly play in a Bills uniform it was obvious he had "It". Joe Montana had "It". Roger Staubach had "It" We've been waiting three years for JP to show us something. We keep waiting, and waiting, and waiting........ If he was asked if had "It" he would probably respond "What's IT?" This isn't necessarily intended as a slam against JP, as I said most players don't have "It". But JP so far hasn't shown that he's got much of anything, let alone "It". Alright, I know this was probably a dumbass post, so flame away. 807101[/snapback] What, does Leinart frequent ebay? OTOH, many posters here dont have "IT", and by "IT" i mean any common football sense or any reasonable knowledge.
Orton's Arm Posted October 17, 2006 Posted October 17, 2006 So it is nothing more than talent then? Yes, there are more talented players in the leauge. That has nothing to do with some mystical "it". 807472[/snapback] Imagine a hypothetical, slightly below average starting QB. How much better off are you with your starter in there than you'd be with this guy? If the answer is "not much" then your starter doesn't have "it." But if your starter gives your team a significantly better chance to win the game than a mediocre QB would have, your starter has "it." That's what Elway did for the Broncos.
Lurker Posted October 17, 2006 Posted October 17, 2006 I think this post may have just convinced me to never read the football portion of the wall again. 807560[/snapback]
Bungee Jumper Posted October 17, 2006 Posted October 17, 2006 Imagine a hypothetical, slightly below average starting QB. How much better off are you with your starter in there than you'd be with this guy? If the answer is "not much" then your starter doesn't have "it." But if your starter gives your team a significantly better chance to win the game than a mediocre QB would have, your starter has "it." That's what Elway did for the Broncos. 807876[/snapback] Clearly, the government should therefore be paying mothers with "it" to have more children, then...
Recommended Posts