Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New resources
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Resources
Latest reviews
Search resources
Members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Open Football Discussion
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
you think james jones will cut back on the drops?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="TJV" data-source="post: 376359" data-attributes="member: 4300"><p><span style="font-family: 'Verdana'"> Here's the headline of a jsonline story dated 3/16/2009 reporting the Packers matching the Titans' offer to Bush: "</span><strong><span style="font-family: 'Verdana'"><a href="http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/41346252.html" target="_blank">Packers prove they're happy with Bush on special teams</a></span></strong><span style="font-family: 'Verdana'">" Here are the first two sentences from that story: "</span><span style="font-family: 'Verdana'">Since being claimed off waivers from the Carolina Panthers in 2006, Jarrett Bush has done one thing well for the Green Bay Packers. On Monday, that one thing - playing special teams - became the main reason Bush, a restricted free agent, was able to land a three-year deal that will boost his 2009 salary to $2 million." BTW the story also reports that the Jets, Ravens, Buccaneers, Saints, and Browns showed interest in him. </span></p><p> </p><p><span style="font-family: 'Verdana'">Of course a story on jsonline doesn't prove anything. I know Bush's main value to the Packers and some other teams whose front offices I respect was mostly due to his special teams play because I watched Bush and saw the obvious on the field. Since you disagree his main value was his special teams play can you point to <em>any</em> reporter, personnel guy, or coach who supports your view? </span></p><p> </p><p><span style="font-family: 'Verdana'">BTW, I find it <em>interesting</em> that you are avoiding Bush's play on STs for the entire 2010 season, and not just during the post season. Did you pay particular attention to it? Do you re-watch games and focus on particular players? Or do you stick with your preconceived ideas without allowing new information to modify your opinion of players? </span></p><p> </p><p><span style="color: black"><span style="font-family: 'Verdana'"> I don't think stats ever tell the whole story but I also believe they have value, particularly if they are carefully interpreted. However, "games played" is such an obvious stat it doesn't require interpretation. Yet you keep arguing what is, on its face <strong>IMO</strong>, a foolish comparison: There have been 64 regular season games since Jones and Harrell were drafted. Jones has played in 58 - more than 90% of them - while Harrell played in 14 - less than 22%. In light of just games played, comparing the "staying power" of these two players looks nonsensical, doesn't it? And of course, Harrell was dismissed after the CBA was signed and Jones was extended by a GM who has built his reputation as a talent evaluator and has had four seasons to evaluate him. Teammates Greg Jennings and Aaron Rodgers lobbied the front office to keep Jones. Yet you call Jones a bust. Again, is there any professional observer of the NFL or Packers who agrees with you?</span></span></p><p> </p><p><span style="color: black"><span style="font-family: 'Verdana'">BTW, IMO there should not be any need to "read between the lines" on a discussion board since all posters have the opportunity to spell out what they mean. Look, this is just a discussion board dedicated to the Packers - in the grand scheme of things not very important. I'm glad this discussion has been civil but I've spent more time on this than it deserves. However, IMO comparisons such as the one you made deserve to be challenged. Otherwise, why have a <em>discussion</em> board? </span></span></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="TJV, post: 376359, member: 4300"] [FONT=Verdana] Here's the headline of a jsonline story dated 3/16/2009 reporting the Packers matching the Titans' offer to Bush: "[/FONT][B][FONT=Verdana][URL="http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/41346252.html"]Packers prove they're happy with Bush on special teams[/URL][/FONT][/B][FONT=Verdana]" Here are the first two sentences from that story: "[/FONT][FONT=Verdana]Since being claimed off waivers from the Carolina Panthers in 2006, Jarrett Bush has done one thing well for the Green Bay Packers. On Monday, that one thing - playing special teams - became the main reason Bush, a restricted free agent, was able to land a three-year deal that will boost his 2009 salary to $2 million." BTW the story also reports that the Jets, Ravens, Buccaneers, Saints, and Browns showed interest in him. [/FONT] [FONT=Verdana]Of course a story on jsonline doesn't prove anything. I know Bush's main value to the Packers and some other teams whose front offices I respect was mostly due to his special teams play because I watched Bush and saw the obvious on the field. Since you disagree his main value was his special teams play can you point to [I]any[/I] reporter, personnel guy, or coach who supports your view? [/FONT] [FONT=Verdana]BTW, I find it [I]interesting[/I] that you are avoiding Bush's play on STs for the entire 2010 season, and not just during the post season. Did you pay particular attention to it? Do you re-watch games and focus on particular players? Or do you stick with your preconceived ideas without allowing new information to modify your opinion of players? [/FONT] [COLOR=black][FONT=Verdana] I don't think stats ever tell the whole story but I also believe they have value, particularly if they are carefully interpreted. However, "games played" is such an obvious stat it doesn't require interpretation. Yet you keep arguing what is, on its face [B]IMO[/B], a foolish comparison: There have been 64 regular season games since Jones and Harrell were drafted. Jones has played in 58 - more than 90% of them - while Harrell played in 14 - less than 22%. In light of just games played, comparing the "staying power" of these two players looks nonsensical, doesn't it? And of course, Harrell was dismissed after the CBA was signed and Jones was extended by a GM who has built his reputation as a talent evaluator and has had four seasons to evaluate him. Teammates Greg Jennings and Aaron Rodgers lobbied the front office to keep Jones. Yet you call Jones a bust. Again, is there any professional observer of the NFL or Packers who agrees with you?[/FONT][/COLOR] [COLOR=black][FONT=Verdana]BTW, IMO there should not be any need to "read between the lines" on a discussion board since all posters have the opportunity to spell out what they mean. Look, this is just a discussion board dedicated to the Packers - in the grand scheme of things not very important. I'm glad this discussion has been civil but I've spent more time on this than it deserves. However, IMO comparisons such as the one you made deserve to be challenged. Otherwise, why have a [I]discussion[/I] board? [/FONT][/COLOR] [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Members online
No members online now.
Latest posts
Why I Love The 2026-2027 Green Bay Packers
Latest: El Guapo
Yesterday at 10:50 PM
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Josh Jacobs facing charges…
Latest: milani
Yesterday at 5:13 PM
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Christian Watson signs a 4 year 110m extension
Latest: OldSchool101
Yesterday at 12:42 PM
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Cam Achord new ST coach - Fire him
Latest: OldSchool101
Yesterday at 11:14 AM
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Off Season News
Latest: milani
Sunday at 2:18 PM
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Forums
Open Football Discussion
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
you think james jones will cut back on the drops?
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top
