Setackin
radioactivecowboy88
- Messages
- 3,858
- Reaction score
- 4,612
This guy just sounds like a Jerry hater. Clearly, Jerry is a top 5 GM.
Sarcasm?!?! I hope so...
This guy just sounds like a Jerry hater. Clearly, Jerry is a top 5 GM.
You were the one who brough5t up eleven pro bowl players. I merely pointed out the two times they did so, Jerry didn't have chit to do with it other than hire the coach.
Oh, really?
2) Terrell Owens - Jerry signing despite Parcells not wanting him
Oh, really?
1) DeMarcus Ware - Jerry draft pick despite Parcells wanting Shawne Merriman instead
2) Terrell Owens - Jerry signing despite Parcells not wanting him
3) Flozell Adams - Jerry draft pick
4) Leonard Davis - Jerry signing in 2007 after Parcells skipped town
5) Andre Gurode - Jerry draft pick
6) Greg Ellis - Jerry draft pick
7) Roy Williams - Jerry draft pick
8) Nick Folk - Jerry draft pick
Tell me again how Jerry had nothing to do with all those Pro Bowlers in 2007?
Swatting at flies, Nav. Jerry would not get hired by any other team, including 32nd on that list. Further, if he were inherited somehow by a team, he would be fired after showing he has no cncept in building a winner.
Anecdotal examples do not tell the entire tale. He has had seventeen years since '95 and it took bringing in Parcels to get put together a team Wade won with.
You either have to rank the newer GMs on a curve or take them out and only rank GMs with a certain number of years on the job.Haha so we're grading on curves now? Oh, okay.
And what happens when the GMs that inherited losing teams get fired in a year or 2 because they couldn't turn it around? Do we re-visit this thread and re-rank Jerry where he should've been ranked all along?
So are you going to take back what you said about him having nothing to do with bringing in all those Pro Bowlers or not?
Hardly seems fair to rank him only among GMs whose teams have obviously done well enough to keep from being fired for 5+ years. In fact, you only created that criteria because you know he's done better than the other half that won't last that long. I mean, if you eliminate the newer GMs who haven't proven whether they're good or bad yet, wouldn't it then be fair to include all the GMs who have already been fired in the last 5 years?You either have to rank the newer GMs on a curve or take them out and only rank GMs with a certain number of years on the job.
Let's make it simple and take out all GMs with less then 5 years on the job.
Let's pretend that there are 16 with 5+ years on the job. I'll guess that Jerry's post Jimmy win percentage is about 13 of 16. That would put him at 26 of 32 if you extrapolate.
So are you going to take back what you said about him having nothing to do with bringing in all those Pro Bowlers or not?
No. because you cannot convince me he brought in the morning newspaper.
And of course, you base this on absolutely nothing.
So who gets the credit for all those Pro Bowlers? Jesus? Buddha?
Why is GB's Ted Thompson 3rd? Because he found Aaron Rodgers is pretty much the only reason they give.
That team isn't very good sans Rodgers.
How many Super Bowls did those Pro Bowlers produce? In Dallas, Super Bowls used to be all that matters, I guess we've followed our GM's lead, and lowered our standards.
Apparently the trophies don't matter, just how many Pro Bowlers he can produce...https://encrypted-tbn1.***NOT-ALLOWED***/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTVaAnUhUOHcpLNwF_XwH1IkcHjOdcnISA0h6uiloq267ESGMFWCA
Ted and his shiny trophy say hi.
We've done that at the QB position, why not in every way?
Nothing but 20 years of performance.