Interesting points from Tom Curran

[DaBruinz]

I want to be challenged with facts, i don't want homer arguments. Come on someone bring something. Did Fred Smerlas get a computer someplace!!!

You have been challenged with facts. You've chosen to ignore them..

 

[Doggin94it]

An objective view from an outsider (Jets fan, but still objective)

The problem with the Pats' drafts is that they've been missing a lot more than they hit. They know that's a weakness of theirs, which is one reason they like to accumulate picks; if you're going to bat .200, it's better to get ten plate appearances rather than 2. (BTW, people who want to count Welker and Moss in the 2007 draft - it doesn't work that way. Yeah, you got great value for those picks - but if the question is "how good are the Pats at evaluating college players for selection in the draft?", then Moss and Welker are irrelevant).

That said, last year's draft was an absolute home run for you guys (McCourty, Vollmer, Gronk and Hernandez is one hell of a haul). This year's draft falls into the "too soon to tell" bracket (remember when you guys thought Kyle Wilson was a bust? LOL), but is fair game for criticism due to the positions you guys targeted (not addressing your LB/DE spot was a bad mistake, IMO).

It's kind of fun to watch you guys draft, because my team takes the opposite approach (and has done so pretty successfully). Gholston was a bust, but in their drafts from 2006-2010 (when Tannenbaum took over as GM) they've done a tremendous job, adding:

Ferguson
Mangold
Eric Smith
Leon Washington
Brad Smith
Drew Coleman
Darelle Revis
David Harris
Dustin Keller
Dwight Lowery
Mark Sanchez
Shonn Greene
Matt Slauson
Kyle Wilson
Vlad Ducasse
Joe McKnight
John Conner

That's 16 real contributors (no, I haven't counted Ducasse); Washington, Brad Smith, Coleman and Lowery are no longer with the team, but they each contributed well above where you would have expected them to given where they were picked. 12 real contributors still on the team from five drafts, most of them starters. The jury's still out on Ducasse - he's looked horrible, but he was selected as a small-school project and has shown a bit lately as the Jumbo TE - but even ignoring him, that's a pretty good record.

Even so, the Jets missed badly on a number of early round picks in those drafts - Clemens, Schlegel, Gholston, and potentially Ducasse. But the ratio of hits to misses, particularly in the early rounds, is very high for the Jets. That's not something you can say about the Pats, and - were I fan of the team, or if the Jets had the Pats' draft record - that would concern me.

 

[DaBruinz]

What are you talking about? You lost all credibility first you had Sweed and Kindle in the first round. I mean no one drafts as bad in the second round as the Patriots, that just a fact. And when DaBruinz is debunking you, what ground do you stand on.

I didn't debunk Rob. I corrected him on two points that do not take away from what he's saying.

Funny how you point out my "debunking" him, yet ignore how you got torn apart by me and by Deus Irae..

 

[DaBruinz]

Robo you don't make factual points, you're a cherry picker. If you're going to argue with me, you better have some facts behind you or I will make your arguments look foolish. Go back and look at Deus list of flops on Defense.

Dunlap is a key component on a very good defense and he has been a lot better than one sack. They have him the Game of the week ball this week. He's bee 10X the player Cunningham has.

You mentioned Kindle. He was a SECOND round pick. They took a chance. Trying to criticize Ozzie Newsome is just foolish.

2009 - Michael Oher, solid RT
2008 - Flacco, he's struggling this year, but he's won more playoff game than Brady since 2009.
2007 - Ben Grubbs starting guard, hurt right now, started 48 straight games
2006 - Haloit Ngata

Let's also mention Ed Reed in 2002, Ray Rice in the SECOND Round.


Now Pittsburgh - they draft Big Ben and Troy in 2003,2004

2011 - Cam Heyward, played well in limited time (Pats passed on him)
2010 - Pouncey, one of good young centers in the game immediate starter they also got Sanders in the 3rd round, Antonio Brown in the SIXTH!!!
2009 - Ziggy Hood and Mike Wallace in the 3rd round (they actually can develop a WR
2008 - Mendelhall, pretty good, Sweed was a SECOND round bust
2007 - Timmons and Woodley both starters, William Gay Starter
2006 - Santonio Holmes, Willie Colon
2005 - Heath Miller

And don't forget Harrison was an undrafted FA

Yes, the Steelers draft so well that they gave away Santonio Holmes even after he was a SB MVP. And Limas Sweed is just tearing up the league right?? That was Bruce Davis on the field the other day, yes? How are Mike Neal and Justin Harrell doing as a startiers for the Packers? Pat Lee is such a great All-PRO CB... David Pittman, Yamon Figurs, Sergio Kindle and Chris Chester are just doing so awesome for the Ravens. [/sarcasm]

If you look, those are all considered "high draft picks" based on YOUR criteria (1st through 3rd round). Yet, you gloss over them..

I find it amazing that you give Newsome a pass for Kindle, yet you lambaste Belichick for taking Dowling.. Friggin hypocrite..

 

[jal]

Tom Curran correctly points out that the defense is what it is. Decent in the red zone, gotten better at preventing big yardage plays, but people will drive on them all day. Maybe a few things can be tightened up so the wide open guys (i.e., coverage busts) don't happen but that's about it. You CAN win, but there is a lot of burden on the offense. Which leads me to...

What people should be concerned with is the continually dropping production of the offense. Yards / play has dropped in every single game since the opener, with the first three weeks being excellent (> 7 yards per play) and the offense being just pretty good to middling since then.

Yards / play by week: 8.8, 7.5, 7.0, 6.7, 6.2, 5.4, 4.3. That's a bad trend folks.

A lot of the deep seam routes that the tight ends were running the first three weeks haven't been there of late, whether that's by design or simply because the defense is taking it away, I don't know. But they need to get some more big plays on offense because without them defenses are going to squat on the short and middle-breaking routes all day.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

"But if someone else in some other town had fanned on almost the entire 2006 draft, the entire 2007 draft, top-50 picks in '08 and '09, Adalius Thomas, Shawn Springs, Derrick Burgess, Tully Banta-Cain, Leigh Bodden, Chad Ochonono, Shaun Ellis and Albert Haynesworth? Right, that guy would be sitting next to Eric Mangini and Herm Edwards in Bristol." Debate this Patriot pj people. Because its 100% true.

Master drafter (on a team that has to draft well or they're dead in the water) Bill Polian says hello Tom E. Curran. He hasn't fanned on quite as many FA only because he has a natural aversion to them. But when he has ventured into FA with the exception of a PK he has epic fanned...and his last six drafts have yielded bigger duds than his backup QB... Then of course you have geniuses like Andy Reid or AJ Smith who always make the right talent move only to have it amount to nothing more than a pre season tease... And Ozzie, who despite his reputation hasn't sniffed a championship game in over a decade...

 

[MoLewisrocks]

An objective view from an outsider (Jets fan, but still objective) The problem with the Pats' drafts is that they've been missing a lot more than they hit. They know that's a weakness of theirs, which is one reason they like to accumulate picks; if you're going to bat .200, it's better to get ten plate appearances rather than 2. (BTW, people who want to count Welker and Moss in the 2007 draft - it doesn't work that way. Yeah, you got great value for those picks - but if the question is "how good are the Pats at evaluating college players for selection in the draft?", then Moss and Welker are irrelevant). That said, last year's draft was an absolute home run for you guys (McCourty, Vollmer, Gronk and Hernandez is one hell of a haul). This year's draft falls into the "too soon to tell" bracket (remember when you guys thought Kyle Wilson was a bust? LOL), but is fair game for criticism due to the positions you guys targeted (not addressing your LB/DE spot was a bad mistake, IMO). It's kind of fun to watch you guys draft, because my team takes the opposite approach (and has done so pretty successfully). Gholston was a bust, but in their drafts from 2006-2010 (when Tannenbaum took over as GM) they've done a tremendous job, adding: Ferguson Mangold Eric Smith Leon Washington Brad Smith Drew Coleman Darelle Revis David Harris Dustin Keller Dwight Lowery Mark Sanchez Shonn Greene Matt Slauson Kyle Wilson Vlad Ducasse Joe McKnight John Conner That's 16 real contributors (no, I haven't counted Ducasse); Washington, Brad Smith, Coleman and Lowery are no longer with the team, but they each contributed well above where you would have expected them to given where they were picked. 12 real contributors still on the team from five drafts, most of them starters. The jury's still out on Ducasse - he's looked horrible, but he was selected as a small-school project and has shown a bit lately as the Jumbo TE - but even ignoring him, that's a pretty good record. Even so, the Jets missed badly on a number of early round picks in those drafts - Clemens, Schlegel, Gholston, and potentially Ducasse. But the ratio of hits to misses, particularly in the early rounds, is very high for the Jets. That's not something you can say about the Pats, and - were I fan of the team, or if the Jets had the Pats' draft record - that would concern me.

Except that dispite all this supposed drafting prowess you still can't manage a division win??

 

[DaBruinz]

An objective view from an outsider (Jets fan, but still objective)

The problem with the Pats' drafts is that they've been missing a lot more than they hit. They know that's a weakness of theirs, which is one reason they like to accumulate picks; if you're going to bat .200, it's better to get ten plate appearances rather than 2. (BTW, people who want to count Welker and Moss in the 2007 draft - it doesn't work that way. Yeah, you got great value for those picks - but if the question is "how good are the Pats at evaluating college players for selection in the draft?", then Moss and Welker are irrelevant).

That said, last year's draft was an absolute home run for you guys (McCourty, Vollmer, Gronk and Hernandez is one hell of a haul). This year's draft falls into the "too soon to tell" bracket (remember when you guys thought Kyle Wilson was a bust? LOL), but is fair game for criticism due to the positions you guys targeted (not addressing your LB/DE spot was a bad mistake, IMO).

It's kind of fun to watch you guys draft, because my team takes the opposite approach (and has done so pretty successfully). Gholston was a bust, but in their drafts from 2006-2010 (when Tannenbaum took over as GM) they've done a tremendous job, adding:

Ferguson
Mangold
Eric Smith Mediocre
Leon Washington Gone
Brad Smith Gone
Drew Coleman Gone
Darelle Revis
David Harris
Dustin Keller
Dwight Lowery
Mark Sanchez
Shonn Greene Still hasn't proven himself
Matt Slauson
Kyle Wilson
Vlad Ducasse Makes mediocre look like All-Pro
Joe McKnight Mediocre
John Conner Mediocre

That's 16 real contributors (no, I haven't counted Ducasse); Washington, Brad Smith, Coleman and Lowery are no longer with the team, but they each contributed well above where you would have expected them to given where they were picked. 12 real contributors still on the team from five drafts, most of them starters. The jury's still out on Ducasse - he's looked horrible, but he was selected as a small-school project and has shown a bit lately as the Jumbo TE - but even ignoring him, that's a pretty good record.

Even so, the Jets missed badly on a number of early round picks in those drafts - Clemens, Schlegel, Gholston, and potentially Ducasse. But the ratio of hits to misses, particularly in the early rounds, is very high for the Jets. That's not something you can say about the Pats, and - were I fan of the team, or if the Jets had the Pats' draft record - that would concern me.

If you are going to count guys like McKnight who didn't do jack last year and Connor who is a Poor Man's Heath Evans, then how can you really say you've been objective?

By your LOOSE interpretation of "impact, then by my count, the Pats have had 22 "IMPACT" players since 2006..

 

[Doggin94it]

Except that dispite all this supposed drafting prowess you still can't manage a division win??

Nope. Just a divisional round win. Damn, sucks for us . . . I'd much rather have won the division and lost to you guys in the playoffs.

Anyway, thanks for the thoughtful reply to my post.

 

[Doggin94it]

If you are going to count guys like McKnight who didn't do jack last year and Connor who is a Poor Man's Heath Evans, then how can you really say you've been objective?

By your LOOSE interpretation of "impact, then by my count, the Pats have had 22 "IMPACT" players since 2006..

I didn't say "Impact" players - I said contributors. And McKnight (leads the NFL in Kick Returns) and Connor (starting FB) are definite contributors. The Pats have not gotten enough contributors out of their drafts.

And if you want to compare starters (9 of the players listed start, and that's not counting Wilson) or level of impact (Revis, Mangold, Ferguson and Harris are a far, far better group than the Pats' best 4 picks from the 2006-2010 drafts - Mayo, Vollmer, McCourty and Gronk/Hernandez), that's fine too.

None of which addresses the point: as compared to a team like the Jets, the Pats miss on a far, far higher percentage of their 1st, 2nd and 3rd round picks. If the Pats could get their "hit percentage" up to even league average, they would be scary.

 

[Doggin94it]

If you are going to count guys like McKnight who didn't do jack last year and Connor who is a Poor Man's Heath Evans, then how can you really say you've been objective?

By your LOOSE interpretation of "impact, then by my count, the Pats have had 22 "IMPACT" players since 2006..

BTW - who are those 22 players the Pats have drafted since 2006 who have played up to the standard of, say, Eric Smith (core special teamer, hybrid LB/S who gets significant snaps on D)?

 

[Rob0729]

An objective view from an outsider (Jets fan, but still objective)

The problem with the Pats' drafts is that they've been missing a lot more than they hit. They know that's a weakness of theirs, which is one reason they like to accumulate picks; if you're going to bat .200, it's better to get ten plate appearances rather than 2. (BTW, people who want to count Welker and Moss in the 2007 draft - it doesn't work that way. Yeah, you got great value for those picks - but if the question is "how good are the Pats at evaluating college players for selection in the draft?", then Moss and Welker are irrelevant).

That said, last year's draft was an absolute home run for you guys (McCourty, Vollmer, Gronk and Hernandez is one hell of a haul). This year's draft falls into the "too soon to tell" bracket (remember when you guys thought Kyle Wilson was a bust? LOL), but is fair game for criticism due to the positions you guys targeted (not addressing your LB/DE spot was a bad mistake, IMO).

It's kind of fun to watch you guys draft, because my team takes the opposite approach (and has done so pretty successfully). Gholston was a bust, but in their drafts from 2006-2010 (when Tannenbaum took over as GM) they've done a tremendous job, adding:

Ferguson
Mangold
Eric Smith
Leon Washington
Brad Smith
Drew Coleman
Darelle Revis
David Harris
Dustin Keller
Dwight Lowery
Mark Sanchez
Shonn Greene
Matt Slauson
Kyle Wilson
Vlad Ducasse
Joe McKnight
John Conner

That's 16 real contributors (no, I haven't counted Ducasse); Washington, Brad Smith, Coleman and Lowery are no longer with the team, but they each contributed well above where you would have expected them to given where they were picked. 12 real contributors still on the team from five drafts, most of them starters. The jury's still out on Ducasse - he's looked horrible, but he was selected as a small-school project and has shown a bit lately as the Jumbo TE - but even ignoring him, that's a pretty good record.

Even so, the Jets missed badly on a number of early round picks in those drafts - Clemens, Schlegel, Gholston, and potentially Ducasse. But the ratio of hits to misses, particularly in the early rounds, is very high for the Jets. That's not something you can say about the Pats, and - were I fan of the team, or if the Jets had the Pats' draft record - that would concern me.

The Jets might have had a higher percentage rate per draft pick picked, but they have had issues especially with depth in large part because of the number of picks they have had. They do have issues at CB, o-line, WR, and LB in terms of depth and/or starters. Kyle Wilson has become a pretty good nickleback, but if the Jets thought he was good enough to start they wouldn't have overpaid for Cromartie who is struggling this year.

Both organization has their successes and issues. I personally don't know if the Jets' strategy is all that much better than the Pats. I don't think the Jets have hit enough for the last three years or so. I think Jets fans overvalue the 2009 draft (Sanchez is not the franchise QB you are looking for with the 5th overall pick and I don't think Greene is a lead back). Last year's draft for the Jets was poor.

 

[Doggin94it]

The Jets might have had a higher percentage rate per draft pick picked, but they have had issues especially with depth in large part because of the number of picks they have had. They do have issues at CB, o-line, WR, and LB in terms of depth and/or starters. Kyle Wilson has become a pretty good nickleback, but if the Jets thought he was good enough to start they wouldn't have overpaid for Cromartie who is struggling this year.

Both organization has their successes and issues. I personally don't know if the Jets' strategy is all that much better than the Pats. I don't think the Jets have hit enough for the last three years or so. I think Jets fans overvalue the 2009 draft (Sanchez is not the franchise QB you are looking for with the 5th overall pick and I don't think Greene is a lead back). Last year's draft for the Jets was poor.

Frankly, if you could combine the Jets' hit percentage with the Pats' ability to pile up picks, you'd have a scary good drafting team.

I think you are undervaluing Wilson by a lot (statistically - he has the fourth best opposing QBR in the NFL of qualifying CBs, after Revis, Rodgers and [IIRC] Joseph - and via the eye test, he's a damn good CB). Yes, the Jets re-signed Cro at a big number (not as big as you'd think), but recall that was in the context of the lockout and not having a chance to evaluate Wilson over OTAs, etc - plus Ryan's system highly values CBs. Wilson would likely be the Pats' #1 corner right now, and would start on most teams in the league.

As for the 2009 draft, Sanchez has been good but not great, and has been getting better - albeit in small increments - year to year. The thing with Sanchez is he tends to have very good games and terrible games, rather than a string of mediocre games. That gives Jets fans hope; if he can eliminate "Bad Sanchez" and play to "Good Sanchez" more consistently, he'll justify that pick. Outside of the Ravens game (where he had absolutely no chance due to the loss of Mangold; the Ravens DL brutalized the Jets), he's actually been pretty decent this year: 60% completions, 12 TD-5 INT, 1,426 yards, 7.2 ypa, no QB Rating under 85.8

I know you can't just delete a QB's worst game in analyzing his stats - but the context of that game was not his normal context, and the point is that "Good Sanchez" has been showing up a lot more often this season than last year. Bottom line, as a Jets fan, I'm happy with the pick. Sanchez will likely never be a top five QB in the league - but he'll be an above league average starter with a knack for making plays in the clutch, and I'll take that. (You guys have been spoiled with Brady).

Greene is what he is - a decent back, league average as a starter, who can grind out tough yards and is at his best later in the season. Good enough for a third round pick. And getting a starting OL in the sixth round is great work.

Re depth - I disagree on some. The Jets' top 5 CBs are probably the best in the league (Strickland at 4 and Cole at 5 are better than most teams have, and 1-3 the Jets and Eagles are the only teams in the conversation) . . . don't need much more depth than that. The OL depth looks bad primarily because of the injury to Turner; had he been available when Mangold went down, there would have been much less of a drop off. The real problem was not addressing it when Turner went down. They do have a problem at OLB (though Maybin has been a nice surprise) and only go 3 WRs deep, which is a problem.

 

[Deus Irae]

...As for the 2009 draft, Sanchez has been good but not great, and has been getting better - albeit in small increments - year to year. The thing with Sanchez is he tends to have very good games and terrible games, rather than a string of mediocre games. That gives Jets fans hope; if he can eliminate "Bad Sanchez" and play to "Good Sanchez" more consistently, he'll justify that pick. Outside of the Ravens game (where he had absolutely no chance due to the loss of Mangold; the Ravens DL brutalized the Jets), he's actually been pretty decent this year: 60% completions, 12 TD-5 INT, 1,426 yards, 7.2 ypa, no QB Rating under 85.8

I know you can't just delete a QB's worst game in analyzing his stats - but the context of that game was not his normal context, and the point is that "Good Sanchez" has been showing up a lot more often this season than last year. Bottom line, as a Jets fan, I'm happy with the pick. Sanchez will likely never be a top five QB in the league - but he'll be an above league average starter with a knack for making plays in the clutch, and I'll take that. (You guys have been spoiled with Brady).

Stop with this nonsense. Sanchez is a bottom tier QB in the NFL, and he has been from his very first game. Hope he becomes more than that, as you should, but quit blowing smoke up everyone's ass about his current level.

 

[Doggin94it]

Stop with this nonsense. Sanchez is a bottom tier QB in the NFL, and he has been from his very first game. Hope he becomes more than that, as you should, but quit blowing smoke up everyone's ass about his current level.

He sucks, and he'd be riding the pine if he wasn't a first round golden boy.

Heh. Look at his games this season:

26/44, 59.1%, 335, 2TD/1 INT, 7.6 YPA, 88.7 QBR
17/24, 70.8%, 182, 2/2, 7.6, 85.8
27/44, 61.9%, 369, 2/1, 8.4, 93.8
11/35, 31.4%, 119, 0/1, 3.4, 30.5
16/26, 61.5%, 166, 2/0, 6.4, 105.6
14/25, 56.0%, 201, 1/0, 8.0, 95.6
18/33, 54.5%, 173, 3/1, 5.2, 87.1

One of those games is an outlier - and it's the Ravens game. The rest of the games are well above average for an NFL starter; if his worst passer rating other than that game were his season average it would put him at 14th in QB rating on the season, and including the Ravens game, he's 16th in the league for QB rating (not exactly bottom tier). His QB Rating based on stats excluding the Ravens game would be 92.3, which would be 9th best in the league (just ahead of Vick).

Of course, if you exclude every QBs worst game the ranks would reshuffle, and he wouldn't likely jump into the top 10. But again, it points to how much one outlier game has skewed his year long stats - and how good he's been in 6/7 games this season.

 

[BradyFTW!]

Heh. Look at his games this season:

26/44, 59.1%, 335, 2TD/1 INT, 7.6 YPA, 88.7 QBR
17/24, 70.8%, 182, 2/2, 7.6, 85.8
27/44, 61.9%, 369, 2/1, 8.4, 93.8
11/35, 31.4%, 119, 0/1, 3.4, 30.5
16/26, 61.5%, 166, 2/0, 6.4, 105.6
14/25, 56.0%, 201, 1/0, 8.0, 95.6
18/33, 54.5%, 173, 3/1, 5.2, 87.1

One of those games is an outlier - and it's the Ravens game. The rest of the games are well above average for an NFL starter; if his worst passer rating other than that game were his season average it would put him at 14th in QB rating on the season, and including the Ravens game, he's 16th in the league for QB rating (not exactly bottom tier). His QB Rating based on stats excluding the Ravens game would be 92.3, which would be 9th best in the league (just ahead of Vick).

Of course, if you exclude every QBs worst game the ranks would reshuffle, and he wouldn't likely jump into the top 10. But again, it points to how much one outlier game has skewed his year long stats - and how good he's been in 6/7 games this season.

So, to paraphrase: if you throw out the games where Sanchez really sucks, he's not terrible. Still not good, but not awful.

BTW, do you think that 54.5% passing at 5.2 YPA counts as "Good Sanchez"?

 

[jays52]

What are you talking about? You lost all credibility first you had Sweed and Kindle in the first round. I mean no one drafts as bad in the second round as the Patriots, that just a fact. And when DaBruinz is debunking you, what ground do you stand on.

Can you just admit you're a homer who doesn't like to speak bad against their team. You CANNOT win the argument that this team has drafted horrendously. Or we're all missing it and they can't coach anymore and these players would be good on other teams ala Jerome Mincey.

I certainly appreciate the enthusiasm but attacking long-term and respected posters with nothing but hyperbole and bravado isn't the best way to get started.

 

[Doggin94it]

So, to paraphrase: if you throw out the games where Sanchez really sucks, he's not terrible. Still not good, but not awful.

"Games"? As in more than 1?

Again, I can understand why a Pats fan wouldn't want to acknowledge it - but Sanchez is getting better (as you'd expect from a QB who came out as a Junior after starting only a handful of games in college). At this point, he's played to a quality QB level in 6 games this season and to a close-your-eyes-protect-the-children-awful-for-a-high-school-QB level in one game.

That's a lot better than 2010, when he had 7/16 starts with a QBR under 75, and only 5 games with a QB rating better than his worst non-ravens game this season. And a lot better than 2009, when he had 7/15 starts with a QBR under 75 and only 5 games better than his worst non-Ravens game this season.

For comparison's sake, even throwing out his worst game in 2009 (Buffalo), his QB rating would have been 70.6. Doing that for 2010 (@NE), his QB rating would have been 78.6.

Is it possible Sanchez will regress to his mean over the last 9 games of the season? Sure. But statistically, he's been a better QB than 2010 by every measure - and was a better QB in 2010 than 2009 by every measure. I see no reason to think what we're seeing from him in 2011 is anything but real growth that will continue over the course of the year (I expect 1 or 2 more stinkers from him, but not more), and no reason to think that he can't continue his growth in 2012

 

[Deus Irae]

"Games"? As in more than 1?

Again, I can understand why a Pats fan wouldn't want to acknowledge it - but Sanchez is getting better (as you'd expect from a QB who came out as a Junior after starting only a handful of games in college). At this point, he's played to a quality QB level in 6 games this season and to a close-your-eyes-protect-the-children-awful-for-a-high-school-QB level in one game.

See, here's the thing. It's not that I don't want to acknowledge it. It's that he's not getting much, if any, better. I've seen every Jets game this season. What you claim has happened simply hasn't. It's really that simple.

 

[Doggin94it]

See, here's the thing. It's not that I don't want to acknowledge it. It's that he's not getting much, if any, better. I've seen every Jets game this season. What you claim has happened simply hasn't. It's really that simple.

Fair enough. We disagree. :eat3: