Barring injury, I don't think he will be gone until his rookie deal ends.

 

The stunt we use with Andre Branch is a specific part of our defense, and he fits the play perfectly. He's big, athletic, and can tackle. I think he would have had 10-13 sacks this year had we used the stunt more often earlier in the season. Thoughts?

---

I think Bridgewater at 3 is better value than Mack at 3, yes.

 

<div> 
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL. Clown.
</div>
 
 
 

lol, why is he ever going to be "released" if he produces 10+ QB sacks per year??   

 

shoes. 

---

Thoughts?


I think it's ridiculous to hypothesize whether he will be gone before we've even played a snap of the regular season, let alone the pre-season.

---

Barring injury, I don't think he will be gone until his rookie deal ends.

 

The stunt we use with Andre Branch is a specific part of our defense, and he fits the play perfectly. He's big, athletic, and can tackle. I think he would have had 10-13 sacks this year had we used the stunt more often earlier in the season. Thoughts?

 

My thought is you read too much Big Cat Country.

---

If he has a 10-13 sack season, it would  be the first double digit sack season by a Jaguar defender since Bobby McCray.  It doesn't matter if it's stunts used to get him after the passer.  If he's getting there, the team isn't going to let that go. 

---

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

lol, why is he ever going to be "released" if he produces 10+ QB sacks per year??  

 

shoes. 

 

Why must you always make yourself look like a clown?

 

 

Thoughts?


I think it's ridiculous to hypothesize whether he will be gone before we've even played a snap of the regular season, let alone the pre-season.

 

Andrew Branch is in his 3rd year. Some think he will be cut. 

 

 

If he has a 10-13 sack season, it would  be the first double digit sack season by a Jaguar defender since Bobby McCray.  It doesn't matter if it's stunts used to get him after the passer.  If he's getting there, the team isn't going to let that go. 

 

Exactly my point. 

---

I think Bridgewater at 3 is better value than Mack at 3, yes.

 

<div> 
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL. Clown.
</div>
 
 
 

My thought is you read too much Big Cat Country.

I'm hardly on the site, actually. 

---

I think Bridgewater at 3 is better value than Mack at 3, yes.

 

<div> 
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL. Clown.
</div>
 
 
 

Why must you always make yourself look like a clown?

 

 

How is questioning why Branch would be cut after a double digit QB sack season making ME look like the clown? Seems like the person making this thread is more likely to be seen as the "clown".

---

Andrew Branch is the new guy, right?

 

Heard he might be wearing Blank #2 this year.

---

THERE IS A SKELETON INSIDE OF YOU.

 

RIGHT NOW. THIS IS NOT A JOKE.

Andrew Branch is the new guy, right?

 

Heard he might be wearing Blank #2 this year.

 

yeah.....the OP can't even get his name right, yet implies others are clowns.  

---

Andrew Branch is the new guy, right?

 

Heard he might be wearing Blank #2 this year.

Maybe Andre is short for Andrew? 

---

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

Maybe Andre is short for Andrew? 

 

means nothing when the player doesn't go by "Andrew"...

 

Its no better than the Brian Leftwitch's/ David Jerrard's/ and the like of the past...

---

means nothing when the player doesn't go by "Andrew" 

Whoosh.

---

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

:mellow:

---

Whoosh.

 

....I guess so. 

---

....I guess so. 

There's no guessing.  Trust me. 

---

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

There's no guessing.  Trust me. 

 

well then what was your point? I admit it - whatever you were trying to say with that other post wooshed me. So, again. what was your point?

---

well then what was your point? I admit it - whatever you were trying to say with that other post wooshed me. So, again. what was your point?

 

Sarcasm, but it's lost on those who don't have the horsepower evidently. 

---

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

Sarcasm, but it's lost on those who don't have the horsepower evidently. 

 

I usually have little problem detecting sarcasm. However that post you made seemed like you were defending the OP. 

 

I'd bet there are/ were other people that read your response up there and also took it the way I did. 

 

 

If you were trying to convey sarcasm italics probably would have done a better job for a post like that. 

---

I usually have little problem detecting sarcasm. However that post you made seemed like you were defending the OP. 

 

I'd bet there are/ were other people that read your response up there and also took it the way I did. 

 

 

If you were trying to convey sarcasm italics probably would have done a better job for a post like that. 

Or maybe it just went over your head. 

 

I'm banking on that to be the case. 

---

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