J.J. Watt is a better and more disruptive defensive player than Lawrence Taylor ever was - and not even close.

GTFO! He's won nothing. LT has rings and once threw a drink machine off the balcony of a dorm at UNC onto the basketball courts.

Sally Vixxxxens wrote:

Tackles - this is huge - LT had zero tackles in 182 games. Zero!!! So far this season J. J., in 10 games, has 212. What was Lawrence doing the rest of the time he was not having an occasional sack??!! That is a crazy bad stat.

Passes defended. In 182 games, LT had none. Not one. So far in 3.5 seasons J. J. has 34. 34 to zero.

Forced fumbles - LT had none - El Zippo in 182 games. J.J. has 10 in 58 games..

I call bullShite on these. Where did you get this stuff?

PS JJ is better than LT.

They did not keep pass defensed statistics in the time of LT.

I agree Watt is better - your analysis just sucks.

idiot wrote:

They did not keep pass defensed statistics in the time of LT.

I agree Watt is better - your analysis just sucks.

You are maybe right about my analysis - I looked at 2 different sites with no tackles shown - but he did have quite a few

Isn't a sack usually a tackle?

If LT has no tackles it either is a typo or stat that wasn't tracked for him.

Come on, man!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oWB9ia_ZPjk

So if LT had 2 touchdowns, zero tackles, zero passes defended and zero forced fumbles why the heck is he considered so great? Just because of the sacks?

OK, trolling excuse. But seriously, this is so dumb that it is a real stretch to even call it a trolling effort. More like a troll's brain fart.

Haha, YO (super cereal) wrote:

So if LT had 2 touchdowns, zero tackles, zero passes defended and zero forced fumbles why the heck is he considered so great? Just because of the sacks?

No - I messed up on the tackles and passes defended. My apologies - but the rest holds true.

Sally Vixxxxens wrote:

Tackles - this is huge - LT had zero tackles in 182 games. Zero!!! So far this season J. J., in 10 games, has 212. What was Lawrence doing the rest of the time he was not having an occasional sack??!! That is a crazy bad stat..

Yes, it's "crazy bad" because it is 100% not true.

You literally have to be one of the dumbest people on the planet if you somehow believed LT had "ZERO tackles" in his career?? I mean, I've seen you demonstrate your low IQ many times on here before (global warming threads, any political thread, etc), but this one takes the cake.

In your rush to proclaim a white guy better than a black guy you just make yourself look unfathomably stupid.

(PS LT had 133 tackles in his rookie season alone.

PPS JJ Watt is an amazing player, duh. )

Sally V wrote:

idiot wrote:

They did not keep pass defensed statistics in the time of LT.

I agree Watt is better - your analysis just sucks.

You are maybe right about my analysis - I looked at 2 different sites with no tackles shown - but he did have quite a few

Does that site analyze climate change as well?

Sally V wrote:

No - I messed up on the tackles and passes defended. My apologies - but the rest holds true.

So you 100% completely screw up two of your major points, and you come back with: "Yeah, but the rest holds true" !?

If you knew only an incredibly small amount about football (like maybe watched 2 games in your entire life), you'd know that it would be impossible for an all time defensive legend to have "ZERO tackles and ZERO passes defended" in his career. Again, either you've never watched a football game in your life, or you are literally one of the dumbest people on this planet for believing that that was true.

The OP obviously made the assessment based on some stats sheets without ever watching anyone play the game.

The worst thread - and not even close.

genuine random a hole wrote:

Sally V wrote:

You are maybe right about my analysis - I looked at 2 different sites with no tackles shown - but he did have quite a few

Does that site analyze climate change as well?

No $hit. It just demonstrates that he will believe ANYthing he reads if he wants it to be true, without a second of fact-checking or doubt. Every time I see him post, I am referencing this thread.

Tyrannosaurus Rexing wrote:

Sally V wrote:

No - I messed up on the tackles and passes defended. My apologies - but the rest holds true.

So you 100% completely screw up two of your major points, and you come back with: "Yeah, but the rest holds true" !?

If you knew only an incredibly small amount about football (like maybe watched 2 games in your entire life), you'd know that it would be impossible for an all time defensive legend to have "ZERO tackles and ZERO passes defended" in his career. Again, either you've never watched a football game in your life, or you are literally one of the dumbest people on this planet for believing that that was true.

That's true.

Tyrannosaurus Rexing wrote:

If you knew only an incredibly small amount about football (like maybe watched 2 games in your entire life), you'd know that it would be impossible for an all time defensive legend to have "ZERO tackles and ZERO passes defended" in his career. Again, either you've never watched a football game in your life, or you are literally one of the dumbest people on this planet for believing that that was true.

WINNER!

But yeah, we are supposed to believe Sally's analysis.

If you seriously believe Watt is better than LT, you didn't watch LT play.

Arishole wrote:

If you seriously believe Watt is better than LT, you didn't watch LT play.

What did LT do better than Watt? Most sack leaders come from outside linebackers. Watt is everything LT was concerning sacks, if not better, in a position not conducive to sacks and despite being double-teamed on every play.

The other stats - like passes defended, touchdowns, etc., it is not even close. Watt kills him in all those stats.

I didn't see any gruesomely-broken legs statistics posted.

JJ is soft.

I have yet to find JJ Watts presense on the field against good teams.Against

the Pats twice,Colts,Ravens he was noticeably absent.