Tom Jackson "I picked the Pats big only to motivate the Jets"

[DEVIOUS 1]

However for him to take sides and attempt to affect the outcome - that is a very slippery slope from which I see no return. What's next, espn analysts looking at the coaches all-22 film and giving pointers to one team? Doing the same thing but misleading their opponent?

On that same line of thinking, I was mildly bothered by ESPN's hiring of Eric Mangini the week before this playoff matchup against the Jets. I found it odd that he was basiclly hired to keep repeating gameplan tips to beating the Patriots, both on TV and on their radio stations.

Not trying to rationalize that is the reason they lost, but thought it was definitly BS that it was the one and only main topic he was hired for. (Does anybody really think ESPN hires Mangini if Cleveland had lost to the Patriots this year?) I kept thinking, "when does ESPN bring in a former coach with the gameplan for beating Pitt, or Balt?"

 

[blackglass3]

Tom Jackson is a douchebag, plain and simple. But this is nothing new. And ESPN knows this, which is most likely why they keep him. If they were just reporting news instead of making news, it wouldn't be as highly rated.

TMZSPN

 

[PATSNUTme]

Jackson relaxes in the pool doing the backstroke.

 

[Kontradiction]

alot of ex players have a bias

shannon sharpe, sterling sharpe, marshall faulk, keyshawn jackson

just wait till ocho cinco lands a tv gig after he retires

I'm aware of biases. What I haven't been aware of is those players doing something on national television and then admitting that they did it just to pump up a team that was playing in a big game (like the divisional playoffs).

 

[RussFrancis]

That's a little offensive. Can a guy be fired for such foolishness? That's just blatantly irresponsible journalism. I certainly hope he gets publicly called out on that by Ditka or Berman or someone.

 

[condon84]

Read the book "Patriot Reign" and you will understand why Jackson is the way he is towards the Pats.

 

[RobertWeathers]

Read the book "Patriot Reign" and you will understand why Jackson is the way he is towards the Pats.

Not only was there that issue but BB was a young defensive assistant w/t eh Broncos in 1978. I thought I read somewhere that Tom Jackson (who was a LB on that team) was a complete a-hole to BB.

 

[condon84]

Not only was there that issue but BB was a young defensive assistant w/t eh Broncos in 1978. I hear somewhere that Tom Jackson (who was a LB on that team) was a complete a-hole to BB.

Yeah, it sounds like it must have started way back then, but BB's FU to Tom after the SB win in 01 cemented their relationship. For the most part, I respect Tom's opinion. He's articulate and you can tell his opinions are well thought out and have a point. He's the best out of all those clowns they have on Countdown.

 

[Fball]

As talking heads go, he is one of the better ones on that network.

As far as bias, it's ESPN...what's the mystery? Half of their NFL guys (or more) are ex players or coaches who make absolutely no bones about their bias, Bruschi & Harrison included.

As a side, not sure if anyone caught the re-play of Bruschi's interview after the Pats beat the Colts 20-3 - very similar to Bart Scott's (though not nearly as long or crazy)....

 

[RobertWeathers]

Yeah, it sounds like it must have started way back then, but BB's FU to Tom after the SB win in 01 cemented their relationship. For the most part, I respect Tom's opinion. He's articulate and you can tell his opinions are well thought out and have a point. He's the best out of all those clowns they have on Countdown.

Yea if you read, "Then Brady Said to Belichick", by Jim Donaldson, a couple of players are quoted as saying that early in his coaching career in Detriot, BB had a real tough time relating to players and earning their respect. Some players appreciated his hard work in helping them improve, some brushed him off and cracked jokes at his expense.

Wouldn't surprise me in the least if TJ was one of the ones that didn't treat BB well and because BB has a looooooong memory, he hasn't forgotten.

 

[The Messiah]

If this is true the league needs to strip the Jets of their win and award it to the Patriots. Using the media to cheat their way to victory is despicable and shouldn't be allowed in the NFL.

 

[Ilikehappyppl]

I think he is an a- hole and should be fired but he was a pretty decent player with 40 sacks and 3 pro bowls on his resume....Now however,he is a joke

40 sacks???

http://www.nfl.com/players/tomjackson/careerstats?id=JAC577792

Had 20 picks and 13 sacks but played 14 years....Not much of a football player like I said....He was mediocre at best

You don't have to make up stats, or maybe you didn't check your facts first.

 

[LetsGoPats36]

Tom Jackson: "It's all about meeeeeeeeeee"

Go **** yourself, tool.

 

[PATRIOTSFANINPA]

40 sacks???

Tom Jackson: Career Stats at NFL.com

Had 20 picks and 13 sacks but played 14 years....Not much of a football player like I said....He was mediocre at best

You don't have to make up stats, or maybe you didn't check your facts first.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom_Jackson_(American_football)

Better get some glasses bud...you have no idea what you are talking about

 

[robbomango]

next year BB should show TJ's comments to the team every time they're favored.:rocker:

 

[Ron Sellers]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom_Jackson_(American_football)

Better get some glasses bud...you have no idea what you are talking about

Actually this is a perfect example of why wikipedia should be avoided as a reference source. Anybody can write anything on a wiki page, and unless it is totally outlandish it probably does not get corrected - and meanwhile it then gets quoted as fact.

The wikipedia page does indeed say 40 sacks. Interestingly that wiki page uses the very same NFL.com link as its point of reference that Ilikehappyppl linked.

Per that NFL.com link Jackson had 20 picks and 13 sacks in his career. Pro Football Reference says the same thing.

Wikipedia may be the first site that comes up on an internet search, but it is far from the most accurate - as this example proves.

Tom Jackson (American Football) - Wikipedia
Tom Jackson: Career Stats at NFL.com
Tom Jackson NFL & AFL Football Statistics - Pro-Football-Reference.com

 

[signbabybrady]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom_Jackson_(American_football)

Better get some glasses bud...you have no idea what you are talking about

OK guys no need to fight about. The sack was not made an official stat until 1982 or so. so he likely has 13 official and a guestimated 40. Lets not let this ahole split the board

 

[Kontradiction]

As talking heads go, he is one of the better ones on that network.

As far as bias, it's ESPN...what's the mystery? Half of their NFL guys (or more) are ex players or coaches who make absolutely no bones about their bias, Bruschi & Harrison included.

Not fair to include Harrison in that. For one, Harrison doesn't work for ESPN. He works for NBC. Secondly, Harrison has been pretty objective when it comes to the Pats. He gave the secret on how to beat our offense week after week on "Football Night in America". He also told Brady to "take off the pink skirt" after that stuff with Terrell Suggs in 2009.

Bruschi, on the other hand, started off as a MASSIVE homer but slowly became more and more objective toward the team. He was as objective as could be to start this season, but broke down again on "Tedy Bruschi Night", which was the night of the second Jets game this year.

Either way, neither of these guys publicly admitted to doing something on national television to sway a playoff contest in one team's favor. If you can find such an instance, please educate me.

As a side, not sure if anyone caught the re-play of Bruschi's interview after the Pats beat the Colts 20-3 - very similar to Bart Scott's (though not nearly as long or crazy)....

That's why I think it's hypocritical of Pats fans to come down on Scott for that. They talked, they backed it up, they kicked the Patriots' asses. He can say whatever he wants because they, and not the Pats, did their talking on the field. Besides, if we're going to cream our pants when Bruschi does the same thing toward the Colts, we should learn to deal with it when Scott does it to the Pats.

 

[PATRIOTSFANINPA]

OK guys no need to fight about. The sack was not made an official stat until 1982 or so. so he likely has 13 official and a guestimated 40. Lets not let this ahole split the board

Yeah,I am going by the source I read...but I do take exception to some dork who says I made it up

There are probalby a gazillion sources to look at and some are different from others

 

[Ilikehappyppl]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom_Jackson_(American_football)

Better get some glasses bud...you have no idea what you are talking about

Wiki??? really???

God help us all....if that's your source, you should not be allowed to be on the internet.:bricks:

Actually this is a perfect example of why wikipedia should be avoided as a reference source. Anybody can write anything on a wiki page, and unless it is totally outlandish it probably does not get corrected - and meanwhile it then gets quoted as fact.

The wikipedia page does indeed say 40 sacks. Interestingly that wiki page uses the very same NFL.com link as its point of reference that Ilikehappyppl linked.

Per that NFL.com link Jackson had 20 picks and 13 sacks in his career. Pro Football Reference says the same thing.

Wikipedia may be the first site that comes up on an internet search, but it is far from the most accurate - as this example proves.

Tom Jackson (American Football) - Wikipedia
Tom Jackson: Career Stats at NFL.com
Tom Jackson NFL & AFL Football Statistics - Pro-Football-Reference.com

Thank You!

Yeah,I am going by the source I read...but I do take exception to some dork who says I made it up

There are probalby a gazillion sources to look at and some are different from others

You might as well have made it up, you used the worst place to get information....and no there are not a gazillion different sources saying diffrent things, there is one place saying one thing and everyone else saying the same thing.

You can't just guess and use it as fact(wikipedia), so sacks where not counted before 1982, that doesn't mean you can just make up a numbers.... I will be nice and say even if he did have 40 sacks(which he didn't I would say 25-30), he's still mediocre