Ed Reed ...possibly to the Jets??

  1. This post has been removed.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bungalow-Bill. Show Bungalow-Bill's posts

    Re: Ed Reed ...possibly to the Jets??

    In response to coolade2's comment:


    Ego or lack of brains.  Both things a problem going forward.  Choosing the clown show to fade out your career...HAHAHAHA....  lol. 




    Umm, didn't they play the Patriots very close twice? With a rookie QB? Some of you overrate the Patriots so much.

     
  3. This post has been removed.

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bungalow-Bill. Show Bungalow-Bill's posts

    Re: Ed Reed ...possibly to the Jets??

    Oh, I didn't realize it only rained when the Patriots had the ball.

    And yes, it was a bad call. Does that change the fact that it was a close game, Eistein?

    You're the master of bs...

     
  5. This post has been removed.

     
  6. This post has been removed.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from MattC05. Show MattC05's posts

    Re: Ed Reed ...possibly to the Jets??

    In response to Harvey-Wallbanger's comment:

     

    No. The Pats' offense was clearly off to a sluggish start in the first game. A monsoon didn't help either, especially without Gronk.



    Wasn't the monsoon in the Cincinnatti game?

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bungalow-Bill. Show Bungalow-Bill's posts

    Re: Ed Reed ...possibly to the Jets??

    In response to MattC05's comment:

    In response to Harvey-Wallbanger's comment:

     

    No. The Pats' offense was clearly off to a sluggish start in the first game. A monsoon didn't help either, especially without Gronk.



    Wasn't the monsoon in the Cincinnatti game?



    It rained in the Thursday night game against NY too. What Einstein fails to realize is that it affected both teams. He's just making excuses because the Pats didn't hammer the Jets like he predicted and spammed the board about (both times).

     
  9. This post has been removed.

     
  10. This post has been removed.

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from MattC05. Show MattC05's posts

    Re: Ed Reed ...possibly to the Jets??

    In response to Harvey-Wallbanger's comment:

    In response to MattC05's comment:

    In response to Harvey-Wallbanger's comment:

     

    No. The Pats' offense was clearly off to a sluggish start in the first game. A monsoon didn't help either, especially without Gronk.



    Wasn't the monsoon in the Cincinnatti game?



    I think both games had awful rainy weather. Actually, the Cincy game only had it for a portion of the 4th, where most if not all the Jets game in Sept, it rained consistently.

    Who cares? We all know the offense either was missing key guys or had new, young WRs.

    This becomes the success of the Jets franchise's history to play a division game close vs NE and then not be embarrassed they had to get help from the refs at home in OT.

    I would take the win and run, not brag about it as some incredible achievement.

    That is the difference between a Jets fan and Pats fan. Their bar of success is measured in non-sensical entities.

     



    OH, you're talking about the win vs. the Jets, not the loss.  The Thursday nighter.

    That was such a terrible game to watch, I had completely blocked it out.  That was ugly.  The least satisfying win I've ever witnessed.

     
  12. This post has been removed.

     
  13. This post has been removed.

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bungalow-Bill. Show Bungalow-Bill's posts

    Re: Ed Reed ...possibly to the Jets??

    I was simply pointing out that you were running around here beating your chest predicting blowouts before both of the games. You knew Gronk wouldn't play and you still did it, Einstein.

    I can't prove it unfortunately because that was probably 3 or 4 accounts ago for you, troll.

     

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from Philskiw1. Show Philskiw1's posts

    Re: Ed Reed ...possibly to the Jets??


    I'm waiting to see it written that Reed plays for 400K   Fat chance. He's greedier then Samuael.

     
  16. This post has been removed.

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from Philskiw1. Show Philskiw1's posts

    Re: Ed Reed ...possibly to the Jets??

    In response to MeadowlandMike's comment:

    In response to Philskiw1's comment:


    I'm waiting to see it written that Reed plays for 400K   Fat chance. He's greedier then Samuael.



    I already wrote it for you.  I'll do it again. 400K.  



    You got a link? I've scoured the net and see nothing on his contract. Put up

     
  18. This post has been removed.

     
  19. This post has been removed.

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from Philskiw1. Show Philskiw1's posts

    Re: Ed Reed ...possibly to the Jets??

    In response to rkarp's comment:

    In response to MeadowlandMike's comment:

    In response to Philskiw1's comment:

    In response to MeadowlandMike's comment:

    In response to Philskiw1's comment:


    I'm waiting to see it written that Reed plays for 400K   Fat chance. He's greedier then Samuael.



    I already wrote it for you.  I'll do it again. 400K.  



    You got a link? I've scoured the net and see nothing on his contract. Put up



    Keep looking.  Full disclosure, it's actually 412K + 62K per game he plays.  Best I can tell, that's the vet minimum.



    the 412K + 62K per was the figure Reed was owed if claimed on waivers. Once he cleared waivers, he could sign any deal he wanted. So far, the deal has not been announced..



    Thank you Sir

     
  21. This post has been removed.

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from Iceman4. Show Iceman4's posts

    Re: Ed Reed ...possibly to the Jets??


    seems like he was a little outspoken with the Texans...complaining

     
  23. This post has been removed.

     
  24. This post has been removed.

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from agcsbill. Show agcsbill's posts

    Re: Ed Reed ...possibly to the Jets??

    ESPN reporting Reed went to the Jets.....

     
Sections
Shortcuts