I cannot freaking believe we still won't have back-to-back winning seasons

[Mr. Scot]

1 minute ago, csx said:

It's a witch hunt and an Internet witch hunt at that. It's the easiest kind to perform . You just hit buttons and don't have to do anything or risk anything.

I think one of the silliest notions I've ever heard was people suggesting that Richardson didn't care about winning because all he cared about was making money.

Winning teams make significantly more money than losing teams.

So if you assume Richardson is greedy, then the idea that he doesn't want a winning franchise is ridiculous to the point of utter stupidity.

[Kakarot]

1 minute ago, csx said:

Did he injure all our players? mean old man!

I don't know if JR is a mean man or not, but what I do have is data in front of me that shows we have not been able to be a consistent winner in 20+ years. In this world, when you're not performing or a products performance isn't up to par, someone gets blamed. So CSX, who should get the blame for the overall performance of the franchise? We've gone through a few coaches and gm's, so who should be responsible? 

I know you like to make snarky remarks, so feel free to reply with another one, but I'm just curious on all of this.

[Sam Mills Fan]

11 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

Anybody who knows the owner would tell you that's ridiculous.

Wanting to win has never been the issue with Jerry Richardson.

Knowing how to accomplish it is where the problem lies.

But Richardson deserves credit in that he finally came to realize the way he was running things wasn't working, so he left it up to Ernie Accorsi to pick who the new GM should be. He's since also stood back and let Gettleman make decisions nobody expected him to be on board with (like cutting Steve Smith).

Winning consistently in the NFL is not as simple as wanting to or spending enough money. Plenty of teams have done both and still come up short. Heck, we had nearly everything go right last year and still couldn't seal the deal.

It's just that difficult.

And given this, it's a mistake to assume lack of success equals lack of desire.

The Jaguars had 4 straight winning seasons in the '90s and then went back-to-back again about a decade ago. The Texans, 7 years younger than us, have gone back-to-back twice. Even the Browns had 4 straight winning seasons in the '80s.

 

Literally every other franchise has figured out how to do it, almost all have done it multiple times. It should not be that difficult.

[juliosantos]

we are cursed every good year is followed by 7 and 9 . instead of the panthers we should be named the 79ers

[TarHeel69]

I was also rooting for back to back winning season, but I think it will be tough with our Offensive Line to win out; however, there is another individual record that I am pulling for just as hard.

Greg Olsen currently has 790 receiving yards.  He needs 210 more over the next 5 games to reach 1,000 and become the first tight end to have three consecutive 1,000 yard seasons.

[csx]

3 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

I think one of the silliest notions I've ever heard was people suggesting that Richardson didn't care about winning because all he cared about was making money.

Winning teams make significantly more money than losing teams.

So if you assume Richardson is greedy, then the idea that he doesn't want a winning franchise is ridiculous to the point of utter stupidity.

People are not very smart most of the time. 

I am upset with the season but the same people repeating themselves in every thread is just annoying. it's a competition to be the most negative and repetitive poster. I expect that here by now but it stifles any real discussion. 

Meh.....what can you do other than avoid visiting.....which sucks

[Kakarot]

I'm rooting for both Greg and KB to get 1000 yard seasons. They both have 5 games to do it, and they're close.

[juliosantos]

if we finish 6 and 10 then next year will be 7 and 9 or 8 and 8 if we follow the trend 

[truthjuice]

15 minutes ago, Kakarot said:

Gotta start looking at JR...

This. It's his organization. Period. 

[Mr. Scot]

10 minutes ago, Sam Mills Fan said:

The Jaguars had 4 straight winning seasons in the '90s and then went back-to-back again about a decade ago. The Texans, 7 years younger than us, have gone back-to-back twice. Even the Browns had 4 straight winning seasons in the '80s.

 

Literally every other franchise has figured out how to do it, almost all have done it multiple times. It should not be that difficult.

How many Super Bowls have the Jags, Texans, and expansion Browns gone to?

Hell, there are teams that have been in existence for decades longer than us who have yet to make it to even one. We've been to two.

But I know tantrums are your thing, so don't let me stop you.

[pstall]

Raise your hand if you want to be the Lions or the teams mr.scor just mentioned?

4 NFC champ games and 2 Super Bowls in that same span

I will take this stretch for the next 20

[Sam Mills Fan]

12 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

How many Super Bowls have the Jags, Texans, and expansion Browns gone to?

Hell, there are teams that have been in existence for decades longer than us who have yet to make it to even one. We've been to two.

But I know tantrums are your thing, so don't let me stop you.

Just stating facts, I'm no longer emotionally invested in this team enough to throw tantrums. 

 

So I guess you're saying "Why complain? We have a better history than the Jaguars, Texans, and Browns!" If that's the standard you want for a franchise, I guess you're right, why complain?

[Mr. Scot]

1 minute ago, Sam Mills Fan said:

Just stating facts, I'm no longer emotionally invested in this team enough to throw tantrums. 

So I guess you're saying "Why complain? We have a better history than the Jaguars, Texans, and Browns!" If that's the standard you want for a franchise, I guess you're right, why complain?

Suuuuuure you are.

[truthjuice]

Going to the Super Bowl is not enough. It's like showing up to the hottest party but not going in. Happy we've gone twice butvwe don't have much to show for it.