For those who were around in 2005

[patmoran2006]

Were you guys this rough on JP Losman after just four starts? I'm not being sarcastic I'm just asking a question.

The kid (Trent) is just learning the NFL game. He was basically forced into the lineup after barely two regular season weeks, against the best team maybe I've ever seen (NE)...

And speed bumps or not, the team is 3-1 with him as a starter and were it not for a fluke onside kick recovery and bad defensive call by Fewel would probably be undefeated. He's made a few bad mistakes. He's also made some great throws and since he's been in the lineup we've been controlling the clock much better and keeping our defense more rested. FOr a rookie having to play this early in his career, he gets a flying passing grade from me.

I wasn't into message boards during the Flutie/Johnson years but I can certainly now relate to what it musta been like.

[chernobylwraiths]

Re: For those who were around in 2005

I remember "anybody would be better than Bledsoe".

[gr8slayer]

Re: For those who were around in 2005

I don't dis-like Edwards........ http://www.billszone.com/fanzone/sho...d.php?t=137738

I just don't like that he doesn't score points. That's all...

[PECKERWOOD]

Re: For those who were around in 2005

I remember "anybody would be better than Bledsoe".

That's how I remember it too, over at bb.com atleast. I do remember some beach bum and RJ comparisons as well though.

I like Edwards. It's just the thought of having to go through another 2-3 years of 'rebuilding' that makes me want to throw up. I'm getting sick of this ****.

[venis2k1]

Re: For those who were around in 2005

jp was given alot of support early on from zoners....nothings worse then Bledsoe.

[Captain gameboy]

Re: For those who were around in 2005

You just started a thread a few minutes ago titled:
"I want to say one thing about our QB's and then that's it."

A minute later you start this one.

You should have titled it:
"I want to say one thing about our QB's now, and more in a few minutes."

Geesh.

Anyway, the thing that has been disappointing to me is that Edwards looked better in the first Jets game than he has since.

I think he'll be OK, but I am disappointed in offensive production after his first start, and I don't think his upside is quite as good as I thought initially.

[PECKERWOOD]

Re: For those who were around in 2005

You just started a thread a few minutes ago titled:
"I want to say one thing about our QB's and then that's it."

A minute later you start this one.

Geesh.

Anyway, the thing that has been disappointing to me is that Edwards looked better in the first Jets game than he has since.

I think he'll be OK, but I am disappointed in offensive production after his first start, and I don't think his upside is quite as good as it was.

Surfs up dude!

[Ed]

Re: For those who were around in 2005

I think some people were unfairly critical of Losman too quick, but 2005 was supposed to be a big year where we finally turn the corner again as a franchise the same way we were supposed to in 2003. Probably the two most dissapointing seasons of this decade just based on the hype and expectations going in.

[acehole]

Re: For those who were around in 2005

Good posts and two major differences.

1. It was obvious our starter before JP wasnt the answer.

2. The argument for Edwards was that he was allready better then JP.

So the people who were not cutting JP slack for a sluggish start (putting the blame on him alone)...dont get to use any of those reason when defending thier guy.

If JP goes bye bye next year and he (TE) starts he gets all the slack in the world. Until we draft the next guy and it is under the Bus for him.

Can we cut the BS with the 3-1 crap...there is alot of holes in that arguement. We are undefeated with D Shoumen also so what does that mean..?

Nothing.


quote=patmoran2006]Were you guys this rough on JP Losman after just four starts? I'm not being sarcastic I'm just asking a question.

The kid (Trent) is just learning the NFL game. He was basically forced into the lineup after barely two regular season weeks, against the best team maybe I've ever seen (NE)...

And speed bumps or not, the team is 3-1 with him as a starter and were it not for a fluke onside kick recovery and bad defensive call by Fewel would probably be undefeated. He's made a few bad mistakes. He's also made some great throws and since he's been in the lineup we've been controlling the clock much better and keeping our defense more rested. FOr a rookie having to play this early in his career, he gets a flying passing grade from me.

I wasn't into message boards during the Flutie/Johnson years but I can certainly now relate to what it musta been like.[/quote]

[PECKERWOOD]

Re: For those who were around in 2005

Oh look, it's the groan police!

[patmoran2006]

Re: For those who were around in 2005

You just started a thread a few minutes ago titled:
"I want to say one thing about our QB's and then that's it."

A minute later you start this one.

You should have titled it:
"I want to say one thing about our QB's now, and more in a few minutes."

Geesh.

Anyway, the thing that has been disappointing to me is that Edwards looked better in the first Jets game than he has since.

I think he'll be OK, but I am disappointed in offensive production after his first start, and I don't think his upside is quite as good as I thought initially.

This is actually more about asking what was it like in 2005 during Losman's initial starts; which I wasn't around for much of.

[kinigirly]

Re: For those who were around in 2005

i thought you were done posting about the qbs?

[BillsOverDolphins]

Re: For those who were around in 2005

I think some people were unfairly critical of Losman too quick, but 2005 was supposed to be a big year where we finally turn the corner again as a franchise the same way we were supposed to in 2003. Probably the two most dissapointing seasons of this decade just based on the hype and expectations going in.

Yeah, our "odd" years have been awful since 99:
2000: 8-8
2001: 3-13
2002: 8-8
2003: 6-10
2004: 9-7
2005: 5-11
2006: 7-9
2007: 3-4 (so far)

I'm not saying the "even" years have been peachy, but there is a trend...

The Jets have gone through the same thing (but to extremes)
2002: playoffs
2003: 6-10
2004: playoffs
2005: 4-12
2006: playoffs
2007: wretched

weird

[Johnny Bugmenot]

Re: For those who were around in 2005

I recall saying "this guy never should've gotten the job this soon. What were they thinking?"

So yes... I was pretty hard on Losman.

[YardRat]

Re: For those who were around in 2005

Were you guys this rough on JP Losman after just four starts? I'm not being sarcastic I'm just asking a question.

The kid (Trent) is just learning the NFL game. He was basically forced into the lineup after barely two regular season weeks, against the best team maybe I've ever seen (NE)...

And speed bumps or not, the team is 3-1 with him as a starter and were it not for a fluke onside kick recovery and bad defensive call by Fewel would probably be undefeated. He's made a few bad mistakes. He's also made some great throws and since he's been in the lineup we've been controlling the clock much better and keeping our defense more rested. FOr a rookie having to play this early in his career, he gets a flying passing grade from me.

I wasn't into message boards during the Flutie/Johnson years but I can certainly now relate to what it musta been like.

It was pretty similar...One camp wanted Holcomb, another wanted JP and the discussions at times got pretty heated. The only real difference is those who supported JP in '05 used arguments that apparently don't apply anymore because Losman is now on the Holcomb side of the coin.