PDA

View Full Version : Chad Jackson


PackerPro42
10-31-2006, 07:00 AM
He looked good against the Vikings last night, he even made a pretty amazing TD catch. It looks like he's not a turd after all.
Bretsky
10-31-2006, 07:22 AM
He's a solid player if he could stay healthy
TheRaven
10-31-2006, 07:42 AM
Are we still not past Chad Jackson yet?
Partial
10-31-2006, 08:50 AM
I have him on my fantasy team. He's gonna be a player it looks like. It also really, really, really helps that he has Brady. I don't think he'd be a player if he had Charlie Frye, for example.

Its impossible to tell whos better, but he and our guy are both putting up good numbers.
PackerTimer
10-31-2006, 10:19 AM
are we gonna have to see threads about chad jackson every time he makes a play? i can't believe we are still talking about him.
ahaha
10-31-2006, 12:05 PM
5 games and 1 start. 6 catches for 96 yards and 3 touchdowns. He's the next coming of Bubba Franks.

Those 5 games:

0 catches
2 catches 42 yds 1 td
2 catches 9 yds
1 catch 35 yds 1 td
1 catch 10 yds 1 td
mmmdk
10-31-2006, 12:07 PM
5 games and 1 start. 6 catches for 96 yards and 3 touchdowns. He's the next coming of Bubba Franks.

Those 5 games:

0 catches
2 catches 42 yds 1 td
2 catches 9 yds
1 catch 35 yds 1 td
1 catch 10 yds 1 td

That TD crawl versus Vikes was awesome. Packers got Jennings so no worries mates.
BallHawk
10-31-2006, 09:43 PM
are we gonna have to see threads about chad jackson every time he makes a play? i can't believe we are still talking about him.

Unfortuantly, PackerTimer, yes we are. You see Wausau has a man-crush on Chad Jackson and in a thread before your time here, relentlessly defended Chad Jackson and stated that Jennings will never be as good as Jackson with quotes like,

"I think after this season we'll all be shaking our head that our packers didn't pick this amazing athlete."

"NO i don't think jennings will ever be #2 in the packers offense just because we have rod gardner and TT is in love with ferguson."

"Well I think that jennings will be the ferguson of this career and jackson will be the chambers."

It was an arguement that didn't make any sense and he didn't have any support behind, of course he is entilted to his opinion, but he was stubborn, if you ask me. They still have much more football in both their careers, though. I like others, defended Jennings and said don't be surprised if Jennings is the better NFL player. Because of this Wausau feels the need to make a new post Chad Jackson scores a TD, even though nobody has posted topics for each Jennings TD, even though he has acheived more this season.

Wausau, we know you like Jackson more than Jennings, you've clobbered that into our head numerous times. We have Jennings, get used to it. I, like others, do watch to see how Chad Jackson does, but it is an afterthought and nothing more. So, please, enough is enough.
gbpackfan
10-31-2006, 10:00 PM
Greg Jennings! You guys forget about him already? Damn!!!!
esoxx
10-31-2006, 10:05 PM
Nice summation Ballhawk. Man-crush is an apt description too.
PackerPro42
11-01-2006, 06:49 AM
BallHawk Wrote


even though nobody has posted topics for each Jennings TD, even though he has acheived more this season.

Your right. Jenning's 3 TD catches really smokes Jackson's 3 TD catches.

And as for you saying I didn't support my oppinion with any facts, your wrong. I provided stats, schedules, even videos. So you saying that my reasoning was useless is completly wrong.
PackerPro42
11-01-2006, 06:49 AM
Sorry, double hit
PackerPro42
11-01-2006, 06:52 AM
Oh, and if the Packers would have drafted Jackson, Ballhawk and everyone else on Packerrats would have a man cruch on him, much like you do with Jennings now. The only reason you supported Jennings is because he was a Packer.
Tarlam!
11-01-2006, 07:23 AM
The only reason you supported Jennings is because he was a Packer.

...like....and there are other reasons to support a player...? :shock: :shock: :shock:
Bretsky
11-01-2006, 07:43 AM
Can I respectfully ask that we don't have to witness round 2 of this duel turning personal as opposed to focusing on the football argument ? It's fine to agree to disagree; we have a forum for different viewpoints and it's very often when posters don't agree.

Truth be told on draft day many in here, including me, posted they'd have preferred TT to take the highest WR by most, who was Jackson.

I've come to realize I was "probably" wrong since Jennings has outperformed Jackson this year; but that's still not a foregone conclusion down the road.

Cheers,
B
KYPack
11-01-2006, 09:14 AM
OK B!

Way to hose the lads down.

We don't need to see another ugly exchange with these two again.
cheesner
11-01-2006, 09:46 AM
I've come to realize I was "probably" wrong since Jennings has outperformed Jackson this year; but that's still not a foregone conclusion down the road.

Cheers,
B
Not to mention the fact that by trading down from Jackson to Jennings, the Packers also got Pick no. 75 from NE which was, Jason Spitz. Personally, I like Jennings better than Jackson, but when you toss in our starting and steadily improving guard into the equation, its a no-brainer. TT did well.
PackerPro42
11-01-2006, 03:26 PM
I didn't even intend for this thread to be an argument between Ballhawk and I, but he has a personal vendetta against me or something. All this thread was supposed to be about was Chad Jackson and his progress, not how the Packers made a mistake by not drafting him or anything else.

Ballhawk rips everything I say to shreads and quite frankly, it pisses me off. I never did anything to him except say that I think Chad Jackson is better. But ever since then he's been a hater.
ahaha
11-01-2006, 03:42 PM
I didn't even intend for this thread to be an argument between Ballhawk and I, but he has a personal vendetta against me or something. All this thread was supposed to be about was Chad Jackson and his progress, not how the Packers made a mistake by not drafting him or anything else. .

If you didn't want to restart old arguments then why did you start a thread about a rookie, second round pick, who plays for another team and has so few catches on the season you could count them on your toes? Reasonable Packer fans are going to think you're trying rehash the debate on Jackson vs. Jennings.
HarveyWallbangers
11-01-2006, 03:43 PM
If I had to choose right now, I'd take Jennings. If I had to choose between Jackson and Jennings/Spitz, I'd really take Jennings.
:jig:
PackerPro42
11-01-2006, 03:48 PM
This isn't what the thread is about. It was simply about the progress of Chad Jackson.
HarveyWallbangers
11-01-2006, 04:06 PM
If you didn't want to restart old arguments then why did you start a thread about a rookie, second round pick, who plays for another team and has so few catches on the season you could count them on your toes? Reasonable Packer fans are going to think you're trying rehash the debate on Jackson vs. Jennings.

I kind of agree. The only reason anybody would bring up Chad Jackson in a Packers forum is because the Packers passed on him. Bringing up his progress seems like a way of justifying somebody's belief that the Packers should have drafted him. I would be curious to know whether the same person brought up Jackson when he was struggling earlier in the year. Anyways! I've watched a little of Jackson, and I'd rather have Jennings and Spitz. Could turn out differently. Other than that, I couldn't care less about Chad Jackson.

If you want to talk about a rookie WR, you should bring up Marques Colston. Talk about a rookie WR looking good. Good chance that Colston and Jennings (if he gets and stays healthy) will be your WRs on the All Rookie team.
Partial
11-01-2006, 04:18 PM
I would agree it seems as though Ballhawk has a vendetta towards Wausau. It is reminiscint of SC/BD
HarveyWallbangers
11-01-2006, 04:19 PM
I would agree it seems as though Ballhawk has a vendetta towards Wausau. It is reminiscint of SC/BD

Could be. Don't know. My thoughts are just on the topic at hand.
Patler
11-01-2006, 04:25 PM
This isn't what the thread is about. It was simply about the progress of Chad Jackson.

I'm not trying to pick a fight or be a wise-guy, but what progress? He did not play in games 1 or 3, he caught 2 passes in games 2 and 4, none in game 5, and one in each game 6 and game 7. I don't see a lot of progress there. Yes, he did a nice job keeping his balance to get in the endzone against the Vikings, but I don't see that he has worked himself into a spot as a regular part of the offense. He is a situational contributer, and not much more yet.
BallHawk
11-01-2006, 05:36 PM
I don't have a Vendetta against you, Wausau. I'm not a hater, or whatever the hell else you want to call me. You started a thread about a player who isn't on our team, isn't in our division, didn't used to play for us, so why are you wasting your breath on a pointless arguement? Listen, 32 other teams passed on Jackson, but do you see every damn forum talking about how they let Jackson get a way? Wausau, we know you like Jackson. Good for you. If you want him to do well, than you do that. But don't make a thread about Jackson, because you're looking for trouble, and you know that.

And Wausau, it's a public forum, I'm allowed to disagree with your opinion.
PackerTimer
11-01-2006, 06:31 PM
Greg Jennings is awesome. Chad Jackson is crap. I think that about settles this argument.
PackerPro42
11-01-2006, 07:36 PM
First of all I never said you couldn't state your opinion but that doesn't mean you bash everything I have to say.
BallHawk
11-01-2006, 07:49 PM
First of all I never said you couldn't state your opinion but that doesn't mean you bash everything I have to say.

I disagree with your opinion, Wausau. Yet, you still try to acheive something by creating these unneccesary topics.
PackerPro42
11-01-2006, 08:11 PM
Vendetta.
Partial
11-01-2006, 09:55 PM
First of all I never said you couldn't state your opinion but that doesn't mean you bash everything I have to say.

I disagree with your opinion, Wausau. Yet, you still try to acheive something by creating these unneccesary topics.

Alright, you're out of line saying he doesn't have a place to make these topics. You previously mentioned you have the right to disagree and voice your opinion. He has the same right as well.

You two knock it off. This goes both ways.
BallHawk
11-01-2006, 10:08 PM
Vendetta.

You just don't give up, do you?
Partial
11-01-2006, 10:17 PM
BH, you're being an antagonist too by responding with something like that. People used to ride HH for that same behavior all the time. Just let it marinate and work itself out naturally.

That goes for both of you.
billy_oliver880
11-01-2006, 10:55 PM
I think you guys should take your arguing elsewhere. Let it go.
Spaulding
11-01-2006, 11:15 PM
Thunderdome, two men enter, one man leaves :mrgreen:
Tyrone Bigguns
11-02-2006, 01:56 AM
Couple of rules for life:

1. Always know your bartenders first name.
2. Never insult the chef
3. Never eat a place called Mom's.
4. Never play cards with a man called Doc.
5. Never sleep with a woman whose troubles are worse than your own.
6. Never draft a florida receiver (Quezy, Riedel, Hilliard, Johnson, Jacobs, Reche Caldwell, Gaffney, McGriff)
7. Never draft a FSU lineman.(Reynolds, Wadsworth, Wilson, Carreker, Bryant, Larry Johnson, etc.)