Patriots hiring Vrabel

[BudsOilers]

Tannehill deserves the bulk of the credit for his play.  Not Vrabel.  Not Arthur Smith.  And certainly not Henry.

 

Likewise, trying to infer Henry had some magical impact on Lamar is equally stupid which is why you didn't explicitly claim this but rather implied it.....

 

Tards are gonna Tard.  

[Jamalisms]

Allow me to repeat the obvious in yet another way:

 

"X deserves the bulk of his credit for his play success."

 

... works for them all. And it's no coincidence they (almost all) only ever had success ... together ... in that same, small window.

[OilerTitanHybrid]

Whoa... Jamal is taking on the mighty Bud A. in yet another Tanny argument!?    There is no doubt now that anyone who thought Jamal was JAG JAM (Just Another Mod) better buckle the fuck up!   

[Jamalisms]

I'm the mod. Not a mod.

 

You ungrateful fucks.

[BudsOilers]

26 minutes ago, Jamalisms said:

Allow me to repeat the obvious in yet another way:

 

"X deserves the bulk of his credit for his play success."

 

... works for them all. And it's no coincidence they (almost all) only ever had success ... together ... in that same, small window.

 

But it doesn't.....2019 is the master class on what a good QB does to elevate an offense.  Nothing else changed.  Not the HC.  Not the play caller.  The lineup aside from QB.  

 

You damn well know Vrabel, Smith, and Henry have received infinitely more credit for the run of the success than Tannehill did.  You in fact have argued this many times in many different forms.

 

You were wrong then.  You're wrong now.  At least you're consistent.

 

[rns90]

It’s a waste of time arguing this stuff.  They will never give him credit no matter how much evidence (the kind that is easy to make conclusions on) you provide.

 

It’s always going to be he benefited from X.  They have made up their minds and will never change (same thing w/Mariota being a victim of Mularkey etc.)

[BudsOilers]

2 minutes ago, rns90 said:

It’s a waste of time arguing this stuff.  They will never give him credit no matter how much evidence (the kind that is easy to make conclusions on) you provide.

 

It’s always going to be he benefited from X.  They have made up their minds and will never change (same thing w/Mariota being a victim of Mularkey etc.)

True.  Laughably Jamal was on that one too.  Tards are gonna Tard....when they aren't in the basement playing fantasy video games.

[Jamalisms]

Allow me to repeat the obvious in yet another way:

 

Take an otherwise well-engineered and constructed engine that has a bad cylinder block and magically replace that block with a perfectly formed (but weakened) cylinder block that won't last long. When the engine suddenly starts running really well, is it all because of the new cylinder block or because of all the other pieces as well?

 

Does crediting all the other pieces remove the impact or function or credit due to cylinder block? Nope.

 

If you masturbate to cylinder blocks, will any and all focus on other engine parts be a total boner-killer? Yep. But are you weird as fuck? Yep.

[Jamalisms]

Just now, BudsOilers said:

True.  Laughably Jamal was on that one too. 

 

Mularkey got - deservedly - the quick hook that I told you all was coming from (even before) the moment he was hired.

 

Not that actual events or reality tend to matter to the illuminati but since I haven't bothered saying it in awhile ... "told ya so."

[BudsOilers]

1 minute ago, Jamalisms said:

 

Mularkey got - deservedly - the quick hook that I told you all was coming from (even before) the moment he was hired.

 

Not that actual events or reality tend to matter to the illuminati but since I haven't bothered saying it in awhile ... "told ya so."

LOL you hated the hire from day 1 and cried like a little bitch about the process, even though the veteran players and even Mariota wanted him retained and few teams bring in a first time GM and let's him hire the HC.  You also claimed Mularkey was holding Mariota back and his best production was under Mularkey.  

 

Mularkey wasn't a great HC but he did fine in TEN and helped change the culture.  He was fired for one reason - Robinson wanted to hire is own guy and the two of them boasted about how one playoff win isn't good enough and the bar is SB wins.  They then proceeded to miss the playoffs and were on fumes before Tannehill turned things around and saved their asses.

[Jamalisms]

12 minutes ago, BudsOilers said:

LOL you hated the hire from day 1 and cried like a little bitch about the process

 

Hell, I tried to stop paying attention to the team and couldn't even last an offseason.

 

He was an obvious misstep and a dead man walking from day 1. Him getting the quick hook was so predictable, I predicted it. You continuing to moan about how it wasn't true ... even after it literally happened ... is pretty much your entire MO.

[TerryBoats]

2 hours ago, BudsOilers said:

LOL you hated the hire from day 1 and cried like a little bitch about the process, even though the veteran players and even Mariota wanted him retained and few teams bring in a first time GM and let's him hire the HC.  You also claimed Mularkey was holding Mariota back and his best production was under Mularkey.  

 

Mularkey wasn't a great HC but he did fine in TEN and helped change the culture.  He was fired for one reason - Robinson wanted to hire is own guy and the two of them boasted about how one playoff win isn't good enough and the bar is SB wins.  They then proceeded to miss the playoffs and were on fumes before Tannehill turned things around and saved their asses.

Mularkey gave the Bills their only winning season in the 2000s, and Tennessee the only playoff win they had over a span of 16 years.

[BudsOilers]

3 hours ago, Jamalisms said:

 

Hell, I tried to stop paying attention to the team and couldn't even last an offseason.

 

He was an obvious misstep and a dead man walking from day 1. Him getting the quick hook was so predictable, I predicted it. You continuing to moan about how it wasn't true ... even after it literally happened ... is pretty much your entire MO.

Wow - predicting that someone inheriting a team that had won 5 games in 2 seasons would get fired is hardly being Nostradamus.  The average NFL HC tenure is 3 years.

 

You were upset about the process, which of course the team clearly explained after the season that the GM and HC jobs were separate but equal and that the new GM would not hire the coach.  In addition, the veterans and Mariota wanted Mularkey to be retained and the team clearly wanted some level of continuity for Mariota at the time.  Most of you dipshits didn't want Mularkey and wanted guys like Hue Jackson or Adam Gase or even Chip Kelly.

 

As for his firing, I simply said he was scapegoated by Robinson with the Mariota stuff simply because Robinson had gained power and wanted his own coach.  Which, of course, is 100% true.  And because he used Mariota's shaky 2017 to convince AAS to make the coaching change, he was forced to give him the 5th year option and then double down by forcing Vrabel to play him when it was obvious Tannehill was better in Training Camp.

 

Mularkey wasn't some great coach but he didn't get fired for performance.  Two back to back winning seasons and a playoff win with that team and that QB, especially in hindsight, was way better than the dullards like you pretend it was. 

 

 

 

[OILERMAN]

5 hours ago, rns90 said:

(same thing w/Mariota being a victim of Mularkey etc.)

 

I did laugh when I saw the excuse made for Vrabel that he was stuck with 

Maroita... When I posted Mularkey was stuck with MM it was pure sacrilege 

[rns90]

Just now, OILERMAN said:

 

I did laugh when I saw the excuse made for Vrabel that he was stuck with 

Maroita... When I posted Mularkey was stuck with MM it was pure sacrilege 

In retrospect both guys did their best with Mariota as the starter.  He might actually have more teflon than Henry!  Some people still make excuses for the guy.