Alejandro Avila: Are We Really About To Hand Offensive Rookie Of The Year To An 'Okay' Receiver?

[Navy_football]

7 hours ago, csx said:

We had to back in via tiebreakers and a losing record when the coach repeatedly couldn't prepare his team or make the in game decisions to clinch numerous times.

There was a 3 way record tie in the division. Any team was going to back in to the playoffs via tiebreaker. Why not Carolina if we won the right games to get us in?

[kungfoodude]

3 minutes ago, Navy_football said:

There was a 3 way record tie in the division. Any team was going to back in to the playoffs via tiebreaker. Why not Carolina if we won the right games to get us in?

I mean....you could have just won the game to actually get you in.

[Navy_football]

14 minutes ago, kungfoodude said:

I mean....you could have just won the game to actually get you in.

Agree, they could have. But Tampa could have just beaten Carolina both times. Or Atlanta could have beaten Carolina and Tampa like the Saints did. 

The point is a team had to get in. The best team based on tiebreaker rules. It wasn't luck. No one pulled a name out a hat. Carolina won the division. They weren't gifted it. 

[kungfoodude]

2 minutes ago, Navy_football said:

Agree, they could have. But Tampa could have just beaten Carolina both times. Or Atlanta could have beaten Carolina and Tampa like the Saints did. 

The point is a team had to get in. The best team based on tiebreaker rules. It wasn't luck. No one pulled a name out a hat. Carolina won the division. They weren't gifted it. 

Yeah but it didn't have to get in via tiebreakers. That doesn't happen that often.

That's why I am generally agreeing with @csx. We literally backed into the playoffs on a 2 game losing streak, one of those games being a "win and get in" scenario that ONLY applied to us.

I am not saying there is anything wrong with that, but it is ultimately....a little pathetic.

Now, it's not as pathetic as missing out on getting into the playoffs to an 8-9 team that backed in. So take that, Taint, Cuc and Falcunt queefs.

[shaqattaq]

12 hours ago, dep said:

is this ragebait

yes

[Navy_football]

3 minutes ago, kungfoodude said:

Yeah but it didn't have to get in via tiebreakers. That doesn't happen that often.

That's why I am generally agreeing with @csx. We literally backed into the playoffs on a 2 game losing streak, one of those games being a "win and get in" scenario that ONLY applied to us.

I am not saying there is anything wrong with that, but it is ultimately....a little pathetic.

Now, it's not as pathetic as missing out on getting into the playoffs to an 8-9 team that backed in. So take that, Taint, Cuc and Falcunt queefs.

Oh I don't disagree that Carolina was the master of their own fate and put it into ATL's hands. Not a great look. But getting into the playoffs for a team as young and devoid of talent as this one is no small feat. The margin of error in the NFL is miniscule. One play. One player falling down or slipping. One bad penalty call (or two, or three, or four) could be the difference in winning or losing. 

[shaqattaq]

13 minutes ago, Navy_football said:

Agree, they could have. But Tampa could have just beaten Carolina both times. Or Atlanta could have beaten Carolina and Tampa like the Saints did. 

The point is a team had to get in. The best team based on tiebreaker rules. It wasn't luck. No one pulled a name out a hat. Carolina won the division. They weren't gifted it. 

I technically agree with everything you're saying, BUT... Making the playoffs with a losing record is like screwing your cousin; the result is the same but it's a lot harder to feel good about it.

[Navy_football]

3 minutes ago, shaqattaq said:

I technically agree with everything you're saying, BUT... Making the playoffs with a losing record is like screwing your cousin; the result is the same but it's a lot harder to feel good about it.

ok?...

[DeAngelo Beason]

13 hours ago, dep said:

full article cause fug them

is this ragebait

Either that, or the author is just laughably ignorant as to the gravity of the achievement of getting 1k yards with Bryce Young as your QB.  

[Montsta]

Am I getting this correct? Writes that Tet didn’t do enough and cites BTJ as the example of why while also acknowledging that BTJ poo the bed this year so rookie numbers aren’t indicative of career moving forward? The guy comes across as arguing with himself. 

[cranky]

1 hour ago, kungfoodude said:

Yeah but it didn't have to get in via tiebreakers. That doesn't happen that often.

That's why I am generally agreeing with @csx. We literally backed into the playoffs on a 2 game losing streak, one of those games being a "win and get in" scenario that ONLY applied to us.

I am not saying there is anything wrong with that, but it is ultimately....a little pathetic.

Now, it's not as pathetic as missing out on getting into the playoffs to an 8-9 team that backed in. So take that, Taint, Cuc and Falcunt queefs.

You could use the same arguement for the Bucs. All they had to do was beat the Dolphins or the Saints. They didn't. And don't get me started on the officiating that last game. 

[Kuhndog94]

Who? 

Might as well tell me what the cashier at your local Whole Foods is saying

[Daddy_Uncle]

13 hours ago, SmokinwithWilly said:

I remember a useless fat fug named Alejandro 

 

Good times. PhillyB and SCP roasting his ass. 

[jb2288]

Does this clown understand how hard it is to get 1000 yards as a rookie? With Bryce as your QB? Clown