So whats the argument? WR's with a number less than 20 historically have been bad?

 

lol I cant remember one that has been a worthy starter but doesn't mean there wont be.

 

Strange topic indeed.

 

Not leaguewide, but Jags WR seem to have that bad mojo/ bad luck after choosing numbers from 10-19. 

 

Zero have become a success. 

---

crazy, right? thats what happens when youre a real jaguars fan and not an eagles fan.

Someone here has been doing it all wrong. 

---

Never argue with idiots. They drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.

Not leaguewide, but Jags WR seem to have that bad mojo/ bad luck after choosing numbers from 10-19. 

 

Zero have become a success. 

Ok so the way your name sounds and the number you wear affect your chances of NFL success, gotcha.

---

Not leaguewide, but Jags WR seem to have that bad mojo/ bad luck after choosing numbers from 10-19. 

 

Zero have become a success. 

We'll just ignore the fact that of the receivers wearing numbers in the 80's, we've only seen two who were successful (excluding Shorts from the discussion since you've already declared him unworthy) over the past 20 years.  So, maybe it's the 80's too, right?  Should we give our receivers something in the 100s maybe to break this obvious curse? 

---

Never argue with idiots. They drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.

Ok so the way your name sounds and the number you wear affect your chances of NFL success, gotcha.

Yes.  Lack of skill at the WR position, and less than stellar QB play have nothing to do with it.  It's all about names and numbers. 

---

Never argue with idiots. They drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.

 

 

Strange topic indeed.

 

What does that word mean?

---

We'll just ignore the fact that of the receivers wearing numbers in the 80's, we've only seen two who were successful (excluding Shorts from the discussion since you've already declared him unworthy) over the past 20 years.  So, maybe it's the 80's too, right?  Should we give our receivers something in the 100s maybe to break this obvious curse? 

 

Smith 

McCardell

Shorts 

Barlow

 

successes. 

 

I don't like Shorts, but for a mid rounder, he's done okay. He's just not more talented than Lee/ Robinson/ Hurns/ Blackmon & he's not worth close to Eric Decker $$$ on his next contract.

---

Smith 

McCardell

Shorts 

Barlow

 

successes. 

 

I don't like Shorts, but for a mid rounder, he's done okay. He's just not more talented than Lee/ Robinson/ Hurns/ Blackmon & he's not worth close to Eric Decker $$$ on his next contract.

 

Barlow? Now thats debatable at best. Also, Thats an absolutely pitiful list for a 20 year old franchise almost. 3-4 Truely good WR's in 20 years. It really does sum up the OVERALL curse we have at the WR position.

---

Barlow? Now thats debatable at best. Also, Thats an absolutely pitiful list for a 20 year old franchise almost. 3-4 Truely good WR's in 20 years. It really does sum up the OVERALL curse we have at the WR position.

 

I'd say Barlow qualifies since he wasn't a high draft pick, and wound up as one of the best in the league in his specialized area of punt and kick returner in the late 90's. I think he made a pro bowl or 2 if I am not mistaken. 

---

Smith 

McCardell

Shorts 

Barlow

 

successes. 

 

I don't like Shorts, but for a mid rounder, he's done okay. He's just not more talented than Lee/ Robinson/ Hurns/ Blackmon & he's not worth close to Eric Decker $$$ on his next contract.

Reggie Barlow is a success in your eyes?  He had 522 yards receiving in his EIGHT YEAR career.  His best season was in 1999 when he put up a whopping 202 yards receiving in one of the most prolific offenses this franchise has ever seen. 

 

I'm shocked to see Shorts on your list simply because you don't believe that for one bit, just like you're reaching to put Barlow on that list to discount Shorts. 

 

Like I said, there have been 2 successful receivers with numbers in the 80's over the past 20 years.  It's not the numbers. 

---

Never argue with idiots. They drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.

I'd say Barlow qualifies since he wasn't a high draft pick, and wound up as one of the best in the league in his specialized area of punt and kick returner in the late 90's. I think he made a pro bowl or 2 if I am not mistaken. 

He doesn't even remotely qualify as a receiver. 

---

Never argue with idiots. They drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.

Ill give Barlow credit for being a great return guy but he was average as they come for a WR. I believe he was a 4th rounder and he only played 5 seasons in Jax I think.

 

Heres to hoping he has a better head coaching career at Alabama state.

---

I'm happy for Hurns and hope that he pans out to be something special for this franchise.

---

There are 10 kinds of people in this world.  Those who understand binary and those who don't.

Hurns is someone I like because I can see he's legit. 

 

I like any LEGIT player on the Jaguars, because I see that their play will ultimately help this team in its ultimate goal. 

 

The players I typically do NOT like simply aren't that good. Or put up hollow numbers. 

 

Shorts is the 4th best WR on this team right now.....5th best if Blackmon returns. 

 

So a healthy Cecil wouldn't help the team?  How is an unproven UDFA already better than Shorts?

 

You consistently make stupid statements regarding anything football related.

---

Maybe the 80s number thing has more to do with the fact that back before 2004, when we had good receivers, ie Smith McCardell Barlow, league rules required receivers to wear numbers in the 80s.

---

Barlow was never a Pro Bowler. He was an alternate.....once.


Maybe further studies should be done on receivers named Ernest....Ernest Givens and Ernest Wilford. Hmmm

---

“Motivation alone is not enough.  If you have an idiot and you motivate him,now you have a motivated idiot.” Jim Rohn

 

Barlow was never a Pro Bowler. He was an alternate.....once.


Maybe further studies should be done on receivers named Ernest....Ernest Givens and Ernest Wilford. Hmmm

I'll begin that research in Earnests now...... in earnest. 

---

So a healthy Cecil wouldn't help the team?  How is an unproven UDFA already better than Shorts?

 

You consistently make stupid statements regarding anything football related.

 

It's the eye test. 

 

Maybe the 80s number thing has more to do with the fact that back before 2004, when we had good receivers, ie Smith McCardell Barlow, league rules required receivers to wear numbers in the 80s.

 

Please don't toss Barlow into the mix with Smith and McCardell.  He wasn't even on the same planet at them as far as his receiving skills go. 

---

Never argue with idiots. They drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.

Not leaguewide, but Jags WR seem to have that bad mojo/ bad luck after choosing numbers from 10-19. 

 

Zero have become a success. 

 

Ditto right handed QBs.

 

The thing about superstitions, they simply don't pass the logic test.

---

"You do your own thing in your own time. You should be proud."

Ditto right handed QBs.

Crap! So much for Bortles. Sign Tebow!!!

---