- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: JJ and Co. ranked 5th at QB position according to Chris Low
Posted on 7/21/10 at 10:08 am to TIGRLEE
Posted on 7/21/10 at 10:08 am to TIGRLEE
I like both qbs but how many rushing yards did Jefferson lose due to sacks. Imagine if he didn't get sacked how many extra rushing yards a game we would have. Same with lee he had to get rid of the ball quick which caused int.s. It all falls on the line. This year we will have a good line due to new kids that want it. This year you could throw my grandma in there and shed do better than the last two years
0
Posted on 7/21/10 at 10:21 am to Tigerdandy
quote:
You mean, pick 6 Lee?
Pity on LSU if JL has to come into the game. He impressed u in the Alabama and La Tech games, huh.
some of you make it way too easy.
Posted on 7/21/10 at 11:50 am to TIGRLEE
And Josh Booty looked good against UAB
Posted on 7/21/10 at 11:59 am to TIGRLEE
quote:
some of you make it way too easy.
I agree. It's very difficult to argue against a person such as yourself who completely dismisses objective facts and would rather harp on perceived subjective considerations, intellectually dishonest statements, and hypotheticals.
Posted on 7/21/10 at 12:00 pm to Antonio Moss
quote:
some of you make it way too easy.
I agree. It's very difficult to argue against a person such as yourself who completely dismisses objective facts and would rather harp on perceived subjective considerations, intellectually dishonest statements, and hypotheticals.
Posted on 7/21/10 at 12:00 pm to Sammobile
quote:
is this tigerlee poster bt's alter?
He's actually not as bad as bt
Posted on 7/21/10 at 12:04 pm to Antonio Moss
Compare JJ's numbers with McElroy:
Comp %: yards TD INT
Mac 61 2508 17 4
JJ 62 2166 17 7
Not that big!
Comp %: yards TD INT
Mac 61 2508 17 4
JJ 62 2166 17 7
Not that big!
Posted on 7/21/10 at 12:05 pm to jacksimmons2000
Yeah, McElroy isn't a great QB. This shouldn't be a shock to anyone.
Posted on 7/21/10 at 12:08 pm to Antonio Moss
This thread was more rational earlier... now it has become about other stuff than the quarterbacks in question.
Posted on 7/21/10 at 12:11 pm to Antonio Moss
Wow - this program made a mess of my post. Anyway, McElroy may not be the best QB in the world, but most folks agree he had a good year. JJ had a similar year statistically, but folks are dogging him hard.
All I am suggesting is that NcElroy wasn't a problem for Bama's offense, just as JJ isn't THE problem with LSU's offense.
For his first year under center, I thought JJ was terrific. Give the guy a chance. He had NO o-line, and no running game to take the heat off.
All I am suggesting is that NcElroy wasn't a problem for Bama's offense, just as JJ isn't THE problem with LSU's offense.
For his first year under center, I thought JJ was terrific. Give the guy a chance. He had NO o-line, and no running game to take the heat off.
Posted on 7/21/10 at 12:20 pm to jacksimmons2000
quote:
All I am suggesting is that NcElroy wasn't a problem for Bama's offense, just as JJ isn't THE problem with LSU's offense.
While I somewhat agree, you're trying to compare QBs in an offense with no run game to an offense with an outstanding running game.
I, personally, would not classify McElroy as a "good" QB. He was adequate for the offense he was in.
Posted on 7/21/10 at 12:24 pm to Antonio Moss
quote:
I agree. It's very difficult to argue against a person such as yourself who completely dismisses objective facts and would rather harp on perceived subjective considerations, intellectually dishonest statements, and hypotheticals.
Damn!
Posted on 7/21/10 at 12:27 pm to Antonio Moss
quote:
Antonio Moss
wow, aren't you the enlighted one?
Also it's evident to me that you take pride in missing the point.
FYI..........Try reading threads through before you post things that to you are "perceived subjective considerations, intellectually dishonest statements, and hypotheticals."
I stated earlyier that on paper JJ's numbers were better than JL's
but to a person such as myslef who tries not to completely dismiss objective facts and would rather harp on perceived subjective considerations, intellectually dishonest statements, and hypotheticals that means as much to me as saying KW had 1000 yards rushing and CS had 800 so clearly KW is much bettter.
Look we can spin this any way you want.
Fact is both these dudes are on the same level... and neither has much a leg to stand on esecp crunching numbers from one and two yrs ago.
only number that matter with JL is the ints.
only number that matters with JJ is 112.... and both are unacceptable.
All you are doing is scraping bottom of the fricking barrell on a stupid point if you ask me.
This post was edited on 7/21/10 at 12:30 pm
Posted on 7/21/10 at 12:32 pm to TheDoc
quote:
He's actually not as bad as bt
after a quick look at bts post history its real easy to see why you dont like the guy.
Posted on 7/21/10 at 12:41 pm to TIGRLEE
Look we can spin this any way you want.
This is why I, along with most the reasonable people here, are making fun of you.
We discuss the breakdown of QBs by using stats, personal evaluations, wins/losses, etc., etc. Then you come and say,
"Yeah, but regardless of all of that they're on the same level."
No offense, but it really makes you sound incredibly stupid. Now, if you had some argument or evidence to support your position, that would be one thing. But you just repeating "they're on the same level, they're on the same level, they're on the same, all work no play make Jack a dull boy, all work no play make Jack a dull boy," doesn't make it so.
I thought you were arguing that you weren't stupid?
And what point would that be?
quote:
Fact is both these dudes are on the same level...
This is why I, along with most the reasonable people here, are making fun of you.
We discuss the breakdown of QBs by using stats, personal evaluations, wins/losses, etc., etc. Then you come and say,
"Yeah, but regardless of all of that they're on the same level."
No offense, but it really makes you sound incredibly stupid. Now, if you had some argument or evidence to support your position, that would be one thing. But you just repeating "they're on the same level, they're on the same level, they're on the same, all work no play make Jack a dull boy, all work no play make Jack a dull boy," doesn't make it so.
quote:
only number that matter with JL is the ints.
only number that matters with JJ is 112.
I thought you were arguing that you weren't stupid?
quote:
All you are doing is scraping bottom of the fricking barrell on a stupid point if you ask me.
And what point would that be?
Posted on 7/21/10 at 12:44 pm to TIGRLEE
quote:
after a quick look at bts post history its real easy to see why you dont like the guy.
See what I mean!!!!
Posted on 7/21/10 at 1:01 pm to Antonio Moss
Are those numbers skewed that much to you?
Let me spell it out for you like I would my 5 year old nephew .... They are on the same level bc those numbers that you wrap your life around aren't that much different
, you either are too stupid to see it or more than likely just enjoy being a dick.
I applaud your effort to try to make yourself look like the dali lamma of TD rant mess board but at the end of the day apparently we have very different ideas of what constitues superiority at qb.... But pleaes spare me this know it all mentality you are trying to sell
And just admit you'd rather BB play than JL
As far as the numbers go (ints and 112) if you can't comprehend the point then I don't know what to tell you pal.
Let me spell it out for you like I would my 5 year old nephew .... They are on the same level bc those numbers that you wrap your life around aren't that much different
, you either are too stupid to see it or more than likely just enjoy being a dick.
I applaud your effort to try to make yourself look like the dali lamma of TD rant mess board but at the end of the day apparently we have very different ideas of what constitues superiority at qb.... But pleaes spare me this know it all mentality you are trying to sell
And just admit you'd rather BB play than JL
As far as the numbers go (ints and 112) if you can't comprehend the point then I don't know what to tell you pal.
Posted on 7/21/10 at 1:04 pm to TIGRLEE
quote:
As far as the numbers go (ints and 112) if you can't comprehend the point then I don't know what to tell you pal.
You don't even know why you're arguing at this point.
I don't question the veracity of those numbers, nor their severity. But I seriously question anyone who comes to a conclusion on this issue based solely on those numbers.
P.S. That person is you.
Posted on 7/21/10 at 1:04 pm to dukke v
Think you missed the point pj
Most posts were him and doc fighting about qbs
Most posts were him and doc fighting about qbs
Posted on 7/21/10 at 1:06 pm to TIGRLEE
quote:
Most posts were him and doc fighting about qbs
I know how he is . We have had battles on the SEC rant. I said Saban was still a good coach and he went into a tizzy fit. Calling my family everything in the book. Just being a little punk.
Page 7 of 9
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News