If You Were Jacksonville

Aerolithe_Lion

Well-Known Member
Messages
10,869
Reaction score
11,839
1/4th of veteran franchise QBs have missed more than 13 games over the last three years?

Lol name them

Carson has started 40 in 3 years. At least 1/4 of the other veteran franchise QBs have 40 or fewer, yes. Luck, Rodgers, Tannehill, Smith, Garoppolo, even both Palmer and Romo missed more regular season games in 2016 and 2017 than Carson has his whole career.

Get destroyed
 
Last edited:

QuincyCarterEra

Well-Known Member
Messages
11,324
Reaction score
10,736
Carson has started 40 in 3 years. At least 1/4 of the other veteran franchise QBs have 40 or fewer, yes. Luck, Rodgers, Tannehill, Smith, Garoppolo, even both Palmer and Romo missed more regular season games in 2016 and 2017 than Carson has his whole career.

Get destroyed

You said have missed more than Carson, way to move the goal posts. Carson has missed 13, name the Vets who have missed 13 or more.

You're pulling out retired QBs because your argument is so weak? Lmao.

And no Smith hasn't missed more regular season games than Wentz. So of the 7 QBs(which you're claiming is 1/4th which is also wrong) only four actually apply hahuahahahaha.

Go back to school kiddo, or keep getting destroyed and looking like an idiot.
 

QuincyCarterEra

Well-Known Member
Messages
11,324
Reaction score
10,736
Carson has started 40 in 3 years. At least 1/4 of the other veteran franchise QBs have 40 or fewer, yes. Luck, Rodgers, Tannehill, Smith, Garoppolo, even both Palmer and Romo missed more regular season games in 2016 and 2017 than Carson has his whole career.

Get destroyed
Can't believe you actually posted this, and then you actually thought you didsomething.

1. You changed the parameters that you originally set
2. You were only able to list 7 players
3. Of those seven players you listed two retired players LMAOOIOOO
4. An active player you chose was dead wrong, leaving you with only 4. Yikes

I'm embarrassed for you
 
Last edited:

Aerolithe_Lion

Well-Known Member
Messages
10,869
Reaction score
11,839
You said have missed more than Carson, way to move the goal posts. Carson has missed 13, name the Vets who have missed 13 or more.

You're pulling out retired QBs because your argument is so weak? Lmao.

And no Smith hasn't missed more regular season games than Wentz. So of the 7 QBs(which you're claiming is 1/4th which is also wrong) only four actually apply hahuahahahaha.

Go back to school kiddo, or keep getting destroyed and looking like an idiot.


Never said missed games, YOU did. Read my original post, I always referred to total starts. And I said ‘started as many of fewer’, which Smith applies. You are moving the goal posts on that one. And I didn’t say 1/4 of all QBs, again that’s you changing it to fit your agenda. Every time I specifically said veteran franchise qb, which there are more than 10 who are not right now.

Now you’re just destroying yourself.
 

Aerolithe_Lion

Well-Known Member
Messages
10,869
Reaction score
11,839
Can't believe you actually posted this, and then you actually thought you didsomething.

1. You changed the parameters that you originally set
2. You were only able to list 7 players
3. Of those seven players you listed two retired players LMAOOIOOO
4. An active player you chose was dead wrong, leaving you with only 4. Yikes

I'm embarrassed for you

You even QUOTED my post where I based it on starts not games missed. You’re literally contradicting your own arguments. What are you doing?
 

cowboy_ron

You Can't Fix Stupid
Messages
15,360
Reaction score
24,303
Would you trade disgruntled Jalen Ramsey, Disgruntled Leonard Fournette, and 3 first round picks for Carson Wentz?

Look at this objectively: What are you going to get otherwise for those 2 players? Neither wants to be there, both are headcases. Let's say you draft a qb this year and it fails. It'll take 3-5 years before you fully accept hes a dud and you have to move on. Carson is ready now. You have a talented roster that can win with good QB play today. Maybe the offer is steep, but for a franchise QB the Jags have never really had aside from maybe Brunell, what benefit is there to say no and keep going 5-11?
:lmao::lmao2:That's a lot of expectations for a part-time, avg, injury prone draft bust.
 

kskboys

Well-Known Member
Messages
44,498
Reaction score
47,355
True. So many holes in his post lmao

"Get destroyed" lolololol
Seriously, I used to like the guy and really respected him. Where did this cockamamie theory that there's no such thing as injury prone come from? I mean, there's proof right in front of our faces every day that some players are more prone to getting hurt than others. Just pure genetics. What's next, DNA is a hoax?
 

Aerolithe_Lion

Well-Known Member
Messages
10,869
Reaction score
11,839
Garappolo is a now veteran? He only had two starts prior to his trade midway 2017.

He's been in the league for 4 years and has signed a top 5 QB contract. Veteran Franchise Quarterback is about as accurate a phrase as you could make.
 

Aerolithe_Lion

Well-Known Member
Messages
10,869
Reaction score
11,839
Seriously, I used to like the guy and really respected him. Where did this cockamamie theory that there's no such thing as injury prone come from? I mean, there's proof right in front of our faces every day that some players are more prone to getting hurt than others. Just pure genetics. What's next, DNA is a hoax?

You know very well I never disputed that. It's funny you quoted him specifically, because you two are attempting similar things in this thread. You bother seem to be more interested in going after me than then my posts. Let me explain:

First, read his last comment. It has nothing to do with Jacksonville, it has nothing to do with Carson Wentz's value. He's attempting to win an argument entirely based on the semantics of something I said. Who are considered veteran franchise QBs, and what exactly constitutes as missing games/playing in games and defining who is healthier than who. What if he wins his argument? It doesn't change my point, a good number of franchise QBs get injured as often as Carson. Doesn't change the OP, if Jacksonville wanted Carson they'd give something up for him, whether what I proposed is preposterous or not seems to be of little concern to what he's going after. I concede his misinterpretation of my comment and let him have the argument. Good for him, and then the thread moves on as if he wasn't even there.

Now look at the points you're making, specifically your last 2. Both are made in absolutism; hyperbole. Firstly, you said....

So you're claiming that all human bodies are the same. No one has weak wrists, weak ankles, heart issues, weak hamstrings.

Wow. Are you sure you want to keep making this claim? Before this, you had my respect, just FYI.

You know I never said anything of the sort. By saying I don't believe people can be expected to get injured, you chose to claim I said everyone is the same. You went from absolute white to absolute black. Hyperbole. But by putting the words in my mouth, you're able to make other people reading this thread take your side, adjust their view of me as more negative. You're 'winning' against me, and it's not longer about the OP. This is specifically pointed out when you mention a loss of respect. Why did it suddenly turn into a personal thing about me? Everyone on this board has made absolutely crazy points, wacko views of the league. You have, I have, everybody has and everyone still likes everyone, But right here, right now, it's important for you to point out that you have respect for me and it's gone in the toilet. I said nothing negative personally to you, and had no desire to go after you on an individual level. I'm only ripping posts you make, not you.

Now this post. Again, complete hyperbole. Of course you could go through every post in this thread and see I never once even INSINUATED one person couldn't be more likely to get injured than another. Bad diet, low protein, lifting weights incorrectly, causing undue damage to the shoulder area. Maybe he runs weird, its bad for his knees, maybe he sleep walks, joints dont heal like other people. I never said one player couldn't be 'more prone' than another, as I said in previous posts, if you can make it all the way into the NFL, you have already proven it's impossible for you to be 'injury-prone.'

Prone 1. likely to or liable to suffer from, do, or experience something, typically something regrettable or unwelcome.

'Likely.' No player in the NFL is likely to get injured. If they were, they wouldn't even have made it to college football. Is Fred Taylor 'more prone' than Emmitt Smith to injury? uncontestedly. Is he injury-prone? No, that's absolutely ridiculous. Even then, I never even hinted I didn't think one person can be injured by something that wont injure another. Why do you keep trying to say I said that?

And yet again, you go after me personally. "I used to like this guy." If I post something that sounds nuts, just say "That's nuts! I'm gettin' outta this thread!" But now repeatedly you've gone out of your way to point out this a personal matter about me behind the keyboard. What in the heck is going on?
 

Pape

Well-Known Member
Messages
1,092
Reaction score
597
You know very well I never disputed that. It's funny you quoted him specifically, because you two are attempting similar things in this thread. You bother seem to be more interested in going after me than then my posts. Let me explain:

First, read his last comment. It has nothing to do with Jacksonville, it has nothing to do with Carson Wentz's value. He's attempting to win an argument entirely based on the semantics of something I said. Who are considered veteran franchise QBs, and what exactly constitutes as missing games/playing in games and defining who is healthier than who. What if he wins his argument? It doesn't change my point, a good number of franchise QBs get injured as often as Carson. Doesn't change the OP, if Jacksonville wanted Carson they'd give something up for him, whether what I proposed is preposterous or not seems to be of little concern to what he's going after. I concede his misinterpretation of my comment and let him have the argument. Good for him, and then the thread moves on as if he wasn't even there.

Now look at the points you're making, specifically your last 2. Both are made in absolutism; hyperbole. Firstly, you said....



You know I never said anything of the sort. By saying I don't believe people can be expected to get injured, you chose to claim I said everyone is the same. You went from absolute white to absolute black. Hyperbole. But by putting the words in my mouth, you're able to make other people reading this thread take your side, adjust their view of me as more negative. You're 'winning' against me, and it's not longer about the OP. This is specifically pointed out when you mention a loss of respect. Why did it suddenly turn into a personal thing about me? Everyone on this board has made absolutely crazy points, wacko views of the league. You have, I have, everybody has and everyone still likes everyone, But right here, right now, it's important for you to point out that you have respect for me and it's gone in the toilet. I said nothing negative personally to you, and had no desire to go after you on an individual level. I'm only ripping posts you make, not you.

Now this post. Again, complete hyperbole. Of course you could go through every post in this thread and see I never once even INSINUATED one person couldn't be more likely to get injured than another. Bad diet, low protein, lifting weights incorrectly, causing undue damage to the shoulder area. Maybe he runs weird, its bad for his knees, maybe he sleep walks, joints dont heal like other people. I never said one player couldn't be 'more prone' than another, as I said in previous posts, if you can make it all the way into the NFL, you have already proven it's impossible for you to be 'injury-prone.'

Prone 1. likely to or liable to suffer from, do, or experience something, typically something regrettable or unwelcome.

'Likely.' No player in the NFL is likely to get injured. If they were, they wouldn't even have made it to college football. Is Fred Taylor 'more prone' than Emmitt Smith to injury? uncontestedly. Is he injury-prone? No, that's absolutely ridiculous. Even then, I never even hinted I didn't think one person can be injured by something that wont injure another. Why do you keep trying to say I said that?

And yet again, you go after me personally. "I used to like this guy." If I post something that sounds nuts, just say "That's nuts! I'm gettin' outta this thread!" But now repeatedly you've gone out of your way to point out this a personal matter about me behind the keyboard. What in the heck is going on?

https://www.footballoutsiders.com/stat-analysis/2018/what-does-injury-prone-mean-nfl
 

DCwarrior

Well-Known Member
Messages
1,281
Reaction score
1,392
I’m sure I can find an article on what the curse of the bambino and the goat one in Chicago mean too. Can anyone link the web MD prognosis page on Injury Prone?
I don't go to WebMD anymore. Everytime time I go there it says I have some terminal disease :thumbdown:
 
Top