Schein: Ross is clueless and Miami has the worst quarterback corps in the league | Page 18 | FinHeaven - Miami Dolphins Forums

Schein: Ross is clueless and Miami has the worst quarterback corps in the league

You can't tell me I'm not following my own criteria seeing as how its mine and all mine.

I can b/c you posted it a while back and you stated you needed to maintain success over the next few years. ZERO playoff wins, missing the playoffs 2 of 3 seasons is not maintaining success.
 
I can b/c you posted it a while back and you stated you needed to maintain success over the next few years. ZERO playoff wins, missing the playoffs 2 of 3 seasons is not maintaining success.

Playoff wins are the only measure of success in the NFL? If so, you only need to take another step for 2 AFCC losses to be considered unsuccessful.
 
Playoff wins are the only measure of success in the NFL? If so, you only need to take another step for 2 AFCC losses to be considered unsuccessful.

No, missing the playoffs 2 of 3 seasons is clearly a sign of success. I heard the new goal for teams is to msis the playoffs so congrats you guys are doing great!
 
I can b/c you posted it a while back and you stated you needed to maintain success over the next few years. ZERO playoff wins, missing the playoffs 2 of 3 seasons is not maintaining success.

That sounds more like it doesn't fit your criteria, not mine. I've said the Giants had success after 2007. Your thinking they didn't have success has nothing to do with my criteria.

---------- Post added at 12:08 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:07 PM ----------

No, missing the playoffs 2 of 3 seasons is clearly a sign of success. I heard the new goal for teams is to msis the playoffs so congrats you guys are doing great!

Going 10-6 and missing the playoffs isn't success? The Pats going 11-5 without Brady and missing the playoffs wasn't success?
 
That sounds more like it doesn't fit your criteria, not mine. I've said the Giants had success after 2007. Your thinking they didn't have success has nothing to do with my criteria.

---------- Post added at 12:08 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:07 PM ----------



Going 10-6 and missing the playoffs isn't success? The Pats going 11-5 without Brady and missing the playoffs wasn't success?

My criteria they are elite in 2007 having won the SB, if they didn't win it they would need more sustained success.

10-6 w/ the 10th win being meaningless after getting smoked in a game at GB that was going to determine the final playoff spot meant something(where the elite one threw 4 INts)
 
My criteria they are elite in 2007 having won the SB, if they didn't win it they would need more sustained success.

10-6 w/ the 10th win being meaningless after getting smoked in a game at GB that was going to determine the final playoff spot meant something(where the elite one threw 4 INts)

Good for you. We can all have our criteria. I can't correct your criteria seeing as how its yours and vice versa.
 
I didn't post a specific criteria, you did and based on that the Giants in '07 weren't elite and 2011 is TBD over the next few seasons.
 
What the hell is this then?

I guess I did post it(I can't remember everything I post), either way mine is black and white. I didn't attach the next 3 seasons to a particular SB champ. YOU did and according to your criteria the '07 Giants were not elite.
 
I guess I did post it(I can't remember everything I post), either way mine is black and white. I didn't attach the next 3 seasons to a particular SB champ. YOU did and according to your criteria the '07 Giants were not elite.

That comment was the last one that existed until your last one. You're getting old man :lol:

---------- Post added at 02:01 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:01 PM ----------

I guess I did post it(I can't remember everything I post), either way mine is black and white. I didn't attach the next 3 seasons to a particular SB champ. YOU did and according to your criteria the '07 Giants were not elite.

How many times do I have to tell you that the 2007 Giants were not elite? Not once did I ever say that they were. Pay attention!
 
That comment was the last one that existed until your last one. You're getting old man :lol:

---------- Post added at 02:01 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:01 PM ----------



How many times do I have to tell you that the 2007 Giants were not elite? Not once did I ever say that they were. Pay attention!

I am getting old, only a few more years left in my 30s.:lol:

You now call the '07 team elite b/c they won w/ a different team 4 years later.
 
I am getting old, only a few more years left in my 30s.:lol:

You now call the '07 team elite b/c they won w/ a different team 4 years later.

Nah, the 2007 team isn't elite. Never said they were. Ever. The Giants are elite now for their 2 SB wins in 5 years. I'm not going to go player by player to determine who was on both teams. I don't find that relevant.
 
Nah, the 2007 team isn't elite. Never said they were. Ever. The Giants are elite now for their 2 SB wins in 5 years. I'm not going to go player by player to determine who was on both teams. I don't find that relevant.

Pretty sure they had the same QB. Just sayin'.

ELITE!
 
Back
Top Bottom