Jump to content
[[Template core/front/custom/_customHeader is throwing an error. This theme may be out of date. Run the support tool in the AdminCP to restore the default theme.]]

RB S. Jackson Totally Ineffective


SayItAintSoJoe
 Share

Recommended Posts

Take away his 20 yard run and he's got 25 carries for 48 yards. They can't run out the clock on Denver. I think it's Darby time in St. Louis.

 

This might be the most hilarious thing I've read on this site for years, and I read some of Grits' stuff. :wacko:

 

ETA: 72 yards rushing against a defense that was COMPLETELY focused on shutting him down. Yeah, bring on Darby.

Edited by STL Fan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This might be the most hilarious thing I've read on this site for years, and I read some of Grits' stuff. :wacko:

 

ETA: 72 yards rushing against a defense that was COMPLETELY focused on shutting him down. Yeah, bring on Darby.

 

 

Woe there STL Fan, I didn't mean to get you all riled up. I'm actually a St Louis fan too but I can see a problem here with Jackson. Whenever a top tier running back has that many carries and can't break 100 yards I think there's an issue. He couldn't even punch it in from the 1 yd line. I'll leave it up to you though since obviously you are watching all the St Louis games and I'm just following the stats.

 

I will say this though. Denver got back into the game because St. Louis couldn't run the ball effectively in the 4th qtr. Do you disagree with that point?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Woe there STL Fan, I didn't mean to get you all riled up. I'm actually a St Louis fan too but I can see a problem here with Jackson. Whenever a top tier running back has that many carries and can't break 100 yards I think there's an issue. He couldn't even punch it in from the 1 yd line. I'll leave it up to you though since obviously you are watching all the St Louis games and I'm just following the stats.

 

I will say this though. Denver got back into the game because St. Louis couldn't run the ball effectively in the 4th qtr. Do you disagree with that point?

 

Partially. The defense definitely did not handle Denver's tempo well at the end of the game. But even in this post you seem to be suggesting that Jackson's lack of production was because of him, not his line, the play calling, or the defensive game plan. Denver's players and coaches admitted after the game that their plan was to focus on Jackson and make Bradford beat them through the air, stacking the box all day.

 

Did you even see the goal line plays you're referring to? Horrible, predictable play calls that Denver saw coming a mile away. Jackson's limited production today was not his fault and the suggestion that they switch to Darby is simply ludicrous. Do you disagree with that point?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Woe there STL Fan, I didn't mean to get you all riled up. I'm actually a St Louis fan too but I can see a problem here with Jackson. Whenever a top tier running back has that many carries and can't break 100 yards I think there's an issue. He couldn't even punch it in from the 1 yd line. I'll leave it up to you though since obviously you are watching all the St Louis games and I'm just following the stats.

 

I will say this though. Denver got back into the game because St. Louis couldn't run the ball effectively in the 4th qtr. Do you disagree with that point?

 

1) DEN dedicated itself to stopping Jackson and daring Bradford to beat them. Hence the tough sledding against a stacked box.

2) Bradford obligated DEN and torched them. Were you watching the game? Bradford lit up the secondary like a Christmas tree and hit his first 300+ passing yd game to go with 3 passing TDs.

3) Jackson hurt his hand at the goal line on the attempted flare into the right flats. He was taken out of the game temporarily and Darby finished the drive with the rushing TD.

4) STL called off the dogs and tried to milk the clock - probably a little too early as DEN remained sold out vs the run on D in the 4th quarter. They're a young team and are learning to win. They should have kept throwing and inserted the dagger.

5) If I'm not mistaken, despite going so conservative so early and running into the stacked run D, STL still won the game. That means what they were doing worked. Any win is a good win when a young team is on the road.

6) Did Jackson screw your sister and then punch you in the face as he left in the morning? You seem to have a significant grudge against him even though he did some really tough running despite being constantly outnumbered at the point of attack. His smash mouth rushing was a key factor in the STL win. Jackson was extremely effective today.

Edited by Bronco Billy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1) DEN dedicated itself to stopping Jackson and daring Bradford to beat them. Hence the tough sledding against a stacked box.

2) Bradford obligated DEN and torched them. Were you watching the game? Bradford lit up the secondary like a Christmas tree and hit his first 300+ passing yd game to go with 3 passing TDs.

3) Jackson hurt his hand at the goal line on the attempted flare into the right flats. He was taken out of the game temporarily and Darby finished the drive with the rushing TD.

4) STL called off the dogs and tried to milk the clock - probably a little too early as DEN remained sold out vs the run on D in the 4th quarter. They're a young team and are learning to win. They should have kept throwing and inserted the dagger.

5) If I'm not mistaken, despite going so conservative so early and running into the stacked run D, STL still won the game. That means what they were doing worked. Any win is a good win when a young team is on the road.

6) Did Jackson screw your sister and then punch you in the face as he left in the morning? You seem to have a significant grudge against him even though he did some really tough running despite being constantly outnumbered at the point of attack. His smash mouth rushing was a key factor in the STL win. Jackson was extremely effective today.

 

:wacko:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't get too carried away. Beating McDaniels' Broncos in DEN isn't exactly a tall order these days. Still a good W for STL though.

 

Not beating my chest at all. The Rams did everything they could to try and give that game away, and it was really only because of McDaniels and his staff's arrogance and stupidity (and one bad drop) that it didn't happen. The Broncos are waaaay too talented to be playing the way they are lately. This was the Rams first road win in forever, though, so it was a pretty big deal here in the Gateway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This was the Rams first road win in forever, though, so it was a pretty big deal here in the Gateway.

 

I heard that it was their first road win in their past 20 regular season road games. Another feather in McD's cap this season.

 

Congrats. Your team is headed in the direction I wish the Broncos were.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1ST PLACE IN DIVISION, GO RAMS.

I watched the whole game today and had Jackson in my lineup. It was tough to see him take the ball to the one yard line then get hurt on 1st and goal. He also failed to punch it in from the one on a previous drive. His stat line looks like garbage but Denver really stacked 8 in the box the whole time. Bradford clearly benefited from that. It sucks that SJ39 had a bad game but for Rams fans I think its safe to say Bradford is the real deal and better days are ahead. With the way Bradford's playing, teams may not be willing to stack the box up anymore like the Broncos did. Jackson's not the only play-maker on this team anymore, the rams are pretty talented.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1) DEN dedicated itself to stopping Jackson and daring Bradford to beat them. Hence the tough sledding against a stacked box.

2) Bradford obligated DEN and torched them. Were you watching the game? Bradford lit up the secondary like a Christmas tree and hit his first 300+ passing yd game to go with 3 passing TDs.

 

3) Jackson hurt his hand at the goal line on the attempted flare into the right flats. He was taken out of the game temporarily and Darby finished the drive with the rushing TD.

4) STL called off the dogs and tried to milk the clock - probably a little too early as DEN remained sold out vs the run on D in the 4th quarter. They're a young team and are learning to win. They should have kept throwing and inserted the dagger.

5) If I'm not mistaken, despite going so conservative so early and running into the stacked run D, STL still won the game. That means what they were doing worked. Any win is a good win when a young team is on the road.

6) Did Jackson screw your sister and then punch you in the face as he left in the morning? You seem to have a significant grudge against him even though he did some really tough running despite being constantly outnumbered at the point of attack. His smash mouth rushing was a key factor in the STL win. Jackson was extremely effective today.

 

No didn't you read the my previous post moron, I wasn't watching the freaking game. But it sounds like you were there and you were swinging on Jackson's nut sack the whole time. Sounds kind of odd that you would be jocking the opposing team so much. Do you normally take it up the backside and then thank the one that's doing it? "Congrats. Your team is headed in the direction I wish the Broncos were." How about "f*ck the Rams" and "next time were gonna kick your team's ass". Sounds a lot better then the pathetic slurping sounds that's coming from posts.

 

I thought we could have an intelligent conversation on here about football but judging from your "sister" comment we can't. So bring on the immature dribble.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No didn't you read the my previous post moron, I wasn't watching the freaking game. But it sounds like you were there and you were swinging on Jackson's nut sack the whole time. Sounds kind of odd that you would be jocking the opposing team so much. Do you normally take it up the backside and then thank the one that's doing it? "Congrats. Your team is headed in the direction I wish the Broncos were." How about "f*ck the Rams" and "next time were gonna kick your team's ass". Sounds a lot better then the pathetic slurping sounds that's coming from posts.

 

I thought we could have an intelligent conversation on here about football but judging from your "sister" comment we can't. So bring on the immature dribble.

 

Thanks for confirming my initial impression of you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As usual. I'm getting my ass BEAT in 32 HomAAAARS, but my beloved Rams are the tallest midget in the NFC West! :lol::wacko::tup::tup:

 

And let me say this, I was one of the naysayers about taking Bradford first without a line to protect him. MAN, am I glad I was wrong. :lol:

Edited by cre8tiff
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No didn't you read the my previous post moron, I wasn't watching the freaking game. But it sounds like you were there and you were swinging on Jackson's nut sack the whole time. Sounds kind of odd that you would be jocking the opposing team so much. Do you normally take it up the backside and then thank the one that's doing it? "Congrats. Your team is headed in the direction I wish the Broncos were." How about "f*ck the Rams" and "next time were gonna kick your team's ass". Sounds a lot better then the pathetic slurping sounds that's coming from posts.

 

I thought we could have an intelligent conversation on here about football but judging from your "sister" comment we can't. So bring on the immature dribble.

 

Based on your comments, it would be handy for you to know that it's drivel, not dribble. Ass clown.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Based on your comments, it would be handy for you to know that it's drivel, not dribble. Ass clown.

 

:wacko:

 

Oh, no. It’s the message board GRAMMAR police. You’re right, “dribble” means “to let saliva drip from the mouth; drool”. As in “when I saw yo’ mama yesterday I began to dribble”.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:wacko:

 

Oh, no. It’s the message board GRAMMAR police. You’re right, “dribble” means “to let saliva drip from the mouth; drool”. As in “when I saw yo’ mama yesterday I began to dribble”.

 

God.... I feel like I just wondered into a CoD match filled with 13 year olds making a lousy attempt at being "bad asses" in a FPS when in reality, most would probably shoot their own dam foot off if provided with a live weapon.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

God.... I feel like I just wondered into a CoD match filled with 13 year olds making a lousy attempt at being "bad asses" in a FPS when in reality, most would probably shoot their own dam foot off if provided with a live weapon.....

 

LOL, I have a REALLY crappy connection, so my tag in CoD was Slo Reflexes...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:wacko:

 

Oh, no. It’s the message board GRAMMAR police. You’re right, “dribble” means “to let saliva drip from the mouth; drool”. As in “when I saw yo’ mama yesterday I began to dribble”.

 

Tell the people why you went after me this time, Nancy. Oh, and have you picked up Darby yet? He's available.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tell the people why you went after me this time, Nancy. Oh, and have you picked up Darby yet? He's available.

 

Sure. Not that anyone gives a rat’s ass:

 

After St. Louis Fan’s initial “Ass Clown” remark I decided to send him a PM to try and clear the air rather than going back and forth on this thread. What do I get for my troubles? Some more grammar lessons and my manhood called into question to boot.

 

My PM to him:

 

"Based on your comments, it would be handy for you to know that it's drivel, not dribble. Ass clown."

 

Actually if you read the post you'll notice that I made a reference to oral sex so since "dribble" can mean "to let saliva drip from the mouth; drool" it still kind of works. Although you're right, I meant "drivel". To be honest when I post on-line I really don't pay that much attention to grammer and spelling. I'll apologize in advance for any mistakes I make here.

 

I also don't normally try to tell people off on message boards since that is pretty childish. It's just that when this dude (BB) who doesn't know me from Adam writes a post in which he talks about my sister getting "screwed", I take offense to that. Especially since all I was doing was trying to vent a little frustration over a fantasy player on my team (Jackson) that hasn't produced this season as I expected him to when I drafted him.

 

So there it is. Just a few points I wanted to get across without bumping the thread back to the top.

 

BTW, believe it or not, I really do root for the Rams. All the way back to the Vince Ferragamo LA days.

 

Not bad I thought. Fairly civil, IMO.

 

His reply back:

 

Your mention of "dribble" didn't have anything to do with oral sex, man, c'mon. In the original post, you made a ridiculous statement about Jackson without having the facts or even having watched the game, and when you got called on it, you lashed out. That's childish.

 

And as for not paying attention to "grammer" (grammar) and spelling, that's obvious, and you would get a pass if you weren't trashing someone. If you're really a fan of the Rams you'd know how valuable SJax is to the team and how ludicrous it is to even suggest that Darby is any kind of option, even as a change-of-pace. That's all we were trying to say when you lashed out. And you can't expect people to believe that you were "offended" about the joke about your sister - as if he actually expects it happened, without even knowing if you have a sister, much less knowing anything about her sex life. It's like a yo' mama joke. No one is actually talking about your real mom.

 

As for replying in a PM instead of having the balls to bump the thread and risk having more people see it, I'm just gonna let that go. Keep "rooting" for the Rams, dude.

 

That’s it STL Fan, right? Did I leave anything out? Any missing or misplaced apostrophes you’d like to point out?

 

Please tell me you don’t equate having balls with posting things on message boards.

 

Oh, and one more thing: Yo’ Mama

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information