Nate Jackson

[Superchop 7]

I've seen his hands, his speed, reminds me of Eddy Mac.

Don't be surprised if he ends up our number 2 receiver.

The guy can catch a ball like it's nobodies business. (hands like Scheff)

Especially in traffic.

[Dreadnought]

I've seen his hands, his speed, reminds me of Eddy Mac.

Don't be surprised if he ends up our number 2 receiver.

The guy can catch a ball like it's nobodies business. (hands like Scheff)

That might be something of a stretch...OTOH, I like the guy. I love that tweener type of receiver. He's been snakebit injury wise; He looked like he had gotten his crap together for 07, and was finally ready to contribute something and gets KO'ed again. The big problem is, as I think G-Money pointed out, that his injury is going to be very hard to rehab from. I think this is clearly his last chance. jackson is also a good ST guy, something we haven't had an abundence of lately to put it mildly.

I'm rooting for the guy, but I don't have a lot of optimism. he's not a big cap hit, so he's worth the risk, which is almost none.

[Rex]

Yeah, he reminds me of Eddy Mac.....he is white. That is it.

[topscribe]

Yeah, he reminds me of Eddy Mac.....he is white. That is it.

No, in another way, too: He's tough as nails.

I'm sure you've seen him catch in traffic. I have.

Really, the thought crossed my mind, too.

-----

[Requiem / The Dagda]

Nate Jackson sucks and that's the end of the story.

[Rex]

No, in another way, too: He's tough as nails.

I'm sure you've seen him catch in traffic. I have.

Really, the thought crossed my mind, too.

-----

I am not sure if I have seen all 16 of his career receptions or not. I remember 1 or 2 last year.

[Requiem / The Dagda]

You know what I remember about Nate Jackson? Catching the injury bug every year. The guy is a joke, and a waste of a roster spot.

[Rick]

Catches through first 4 seasons:

16
49
27
11

ya that sucks for sure. Only one fluke year in 4 years.

oh, wait, sorry, that was not Jackson...that was Eddie Mac pre Broncos days.

I don't think nate could ever become an Eddie but nothing is impossible, and stats certainly can't always be an indicator.

[topscribe]

I am not sure if I have seen all 16 of his career receptions or not. I remember 1 or 2 last year.

I didn't say Jackson is another Jerry Rice. I just said he is tough.

I know what he has done. I'm more concerned with what he can do.

They must see something in him . . . you know, those who see him every day?

-----

[NameUsedBefore]

Nate Jackson has potential to be good.

Nate Jackson also has potential to get injured. Repeatedly.

[topscribe]

Nate Jackson has potential to be good.

Nate Jackson also has potential to get injured. Repeatedly.

Everyone has that potential. Seriously.

Yes, Nate has had some injury problems. Doesn't mean he'll keep doing it. His
potential to be good makes it worth it to find out, doesn't it?

-----

[Superchop 7]

Gotta laugh.

The cream always rises to the top.

Nate is good.......mark my words.

[broncohead]

Inless he can beat out Tony S. or Graham then theres not much to talk about.

[Rex]

Gotta laugh.

The cream always rises to the top.

Nate is good.......mark my words.

I wrote them on my desk. With marker. I hope you are right.

[topscribe]

Inless he can beat out Tony S. or Graham then theres not much to talk about.

It's been suggested that he might go back to receiver. Not likely, but the idea
is being bandied about.

-----

[NameUsedBefore]

Everyone has that potential. Seriously.

Yes, Nate has had some injury problems. Doesn't mean he'll keep doing it. His
potential to be good makes it worth it to find out, doesn't it?

-----

Yes. But if he's injured and there's someone that's ready to play behind him I wont fault the Broncos for finally cutting him. From what I've seen of Nate Jackson he has great hands and solid power, but if he keeps getting injured not much you can do with any of that.

[Rick]

Inless he can beat out Tony S. or Graham then theres not much to talk about.


Well if somehow under the grace and miraculous hands of God he became the next Eddie mac, it would not be as TE...it would be WR.

[topscribe]

Yes. But if he's injured and there's someone that's ready to play behind him I wont fault the Broncos for finally cutting him. From what I've seen of Nate Jackson he has great hands and solid power, but if he keeps getting injured not much you can do with any of that.

That is true.

We'll just have to see . . .

-----

[Superchop 7]

I saw his injury.

All he had to do before the game is stretch.

I doubt he will make the same mistake again.

Talent wise......he is a beast.

[Requiem / The Dagda]

Nate Jackson doesn't have much potential, and all the potential that he does have doesn't even matter considering he's spent 3 of the last four seasons with injuries that either ended his season (he's been on IR twice: 2004 and 2007) or plagued his ability to contribute all year long in 2005.

Nate Jackson has more potential on getting hurt again than he does making a significant contribution to this ball club. It is beyond me why he was even re-signed (depth, obviously) given the fact that he can never stay healthy.

If Jackson was good, he'd of already proved it by now. Injuries are a part of the game, but Jackson has been injured most of his career. There's no reason to even hope or expect someone like him to even be able to play at a high level this year. He's what, had sixteen catches in five years in the NFL? Give me a break.

The only thing I've come to expect with Jackson is for him to make the roster, steal the spot of someone who will actually contribute, which would lead for us to cut that player instead of Nate, only to have him get injured and placed on IR while the person who probably deserved his spot more is already signed with someone else and is contributing to some other ball club.

I'm not a fan of Nate Jackson and never was. There's no reason to be.

[Superchop 7]

Well if somehow under the grace and miraculous hands of God he became the next Eddie mac, it would not be as TE...it would be WR.

_
_________________________-

He came into the league as a wide receiver.

His hands are un-questioned.

It's about quick.........and hands.

You need to respect the talent on this team.

[Dreadnought]

It's been suggested that he might go back to receiver. Not likely, but the idea
is being bandied about.

-----

That would make some sense, esp. after dumping worthless Javon Walker

[topscribe]

Nate Jackson doesn't have much potential, and all the potential that he does have doesn't even matter considering he's spent 3 of the last four seasons with injuries that either ended his season (he's been on IR twice: 2004 and 2007) or plagued his ability to contribute all year long in 2005.

Nate Jackson has more potential on getting hurt again than he does making a significant contribution to this ball club. It is beyond me why he was even re-signed (depth, obviously) given the fact that he can never stay healthy.

If Jackson was good, he'd of already proved it by now. Injuries are a part of the game, but Jackson has been injured most of his career. There's no reason to even hope or expect someone like him to even be able to play at a high level this year. He's what, had sixteen catches in five years in the NFL? Give me a break.

The only thing I've come to expect with Jackson is for him to make the roster, steal the spot of someone who will actually contribute, which would lead for us to cut that player instead of Nate, only to have him get injured and placed on IR while the person who probably deserved his spot more is already signed with someone else and is contributing to some other ball club.

I'm not a fan of Nate Jackson and never was. There's no reason to be.

Jackson was re-signed probably because those who know more about
football than you and me put together see something in him . . .

-----

[Requiem / The Dagda]

Jackson was re-signed probably because those who know more about
football than you and me put together see something in him . . .

-----

Yeah? Still doesn't refute anything I said.

Once again, these same people who signed Ian Gold and Gerard Warren to big contracts. This FO has made some of the worst decisions by any football team over the past five years. At least I got it right over a year ago when I called Warren and Ian Gold would be tossed.

This is the same front office who said there was no reason to draft a safety this past year because John Lynch and Nick Ferguson couldn't be supplanted. You know what's funny? We begged John to come back, Ferguson is a free agent and was benched during the season. We're desperate for a safety right now, and we're considering signing Sammy Knight who is on the wrong side of 30 to start at SS for us.

This is the same front office who said Maurice Clarett was a better selection than Marion Barber; and cited Barber's early in career hamstring injury as a justification to not draft him over Clarett. This is despite the fact Clarett was two years removed from football, was extremely overweight at the combine and ran one of the slowest times recorded for a RB at Indianapolis. Clarett is out of the NFL, and has been in numerous legal troubles. Barber III is one of the best young backs in the game.

To go along with that, this is the same front office who justified early injury history against the selection of Marion Barber III to make sure their shit didn't stink in regards to Clarett, yet has drafted numerous players with extensive injury histories and injuries at the time of the NFL Draft. (Toviessi, Hixon, Moss, Foster, etc.)

This is the same front office that let quality player after quality player walk in free agency and tried a multi-year carousel of ex-Cleveland cast-off's and raw players like Corey Jackson to try and create a pass rush and impact on the defensive line.

This is the same front office who traded for a guy who didn't even show up to our camp.

For every step the Broncos take forward, they take two backwards. (Had to make the reference.)

Sorry, but there's no justification for half of the crap we do.

[topscribe]

Yeah? Still doesn't refute anything I said.

Once again, these same people who signed Ian Gold and Gerard Warren to big contracts. This FO has made some of the worst decisions by any football team over the past five years. At least I got it right over a year ago when I called Warren and Ian Gold would be tossed.

This is the same front office who said there was no reason to draft a safety this past year because John Lynch and Nick Ferguson couldn't be supplanted. You know what's funny? We begged John to come back, Ferguson is a free agent and was benched during the season. We're desperate for a safety right now, and we're considering signing Sammy Knight who is on the wrong side of 30 to start at SS for us.

This is the same front office who said Maurice Clarett was a better selection than Marion Barber; and cited Barber's early in career hamstring injury as a justification to not draft him over Clarett. This is despite the fact Clarett was two years removed from football, was extremely overweight at the combine and ran one of the slowest times recorded for a RB at Indianapolis. Clarett is out of the NFL, and has been in numerous legal troubles. Barber III is one of the best young backs in the game.

To go along with that, this is the same front office who justified early injury history against the selection of Marion Barber III to make sure their shit didn't stink in regards to Clarett, yet has drafted numerous players with extensive injury histories and injuries at the time of the NFL Draft. (Toviessi, Hixon, Moss, Foster, etc.)

This is the same front office that let quality player after quality player walk in free agency and tried a multi-year carousel of ex-Cleveland cast-off's and raw players like Corey Jackson to try and create a pass rush and impact on the defensive line.

This is the same front office who traded for a guy who didn't even show up to our camp.

For every step the Broncos take forward, they take two backwards. (Had to make the reference.)

Sorry, but there's no justification for half of the crap we do.

I don't know about all the other stuff in your rant, but . . .

What I suggest you do is take all your great insight to the Front Office and
present it to them because all I said was that they must have seen
something to him.

And that's that. :coffee:

-----

[Requiem / The Dagda]

I don't know about all the other stuff in your rant, but . . .

What I suggest you do is take all your great insight to the Front Office and
present it to them because all I said was that they must have seen
something to him.

And that's that. :coffee:

-----

You missed my point. You talked about how they see something in him, and I talked about how they've "seen something" and made poor excuses in a myriad of situations; which emphasized their poor judgment.

[DenBronx]

can we cut this guy already??? after 5 years on this project im ready for him to hang them up...

[slim]

Nate will not be moving back WR.....LMAO.

[Requiem / The Dagda]

Nate will not be moving back WR.....LMAO.

I heard he will be moving to the nearest hospital.

[slim]

I heard he will be moving to the nearest hospital.

He is a waste of a roster spot. Not that I have anything against the guy, but at some point I need some production.

[dogfish]

He is a waste of a roster spot. Not that I have anything against the guy, but at some point I need some production.

hey now, he's a valuable contributor to this organization. . . .







hell, somebody's gotta keep the medical staff busy. . . .

[Requiem / The Dagda]

hey now, he's a valuable contributor to this organization. . . .







hell, somebody's gotta keep the medical staff busy. . . .

Two cool things Nate Jackson has done:


Dressed up as Santa Claus for Eddy Mac's kids.
Made fun of Sauerbrun constantly at camp.


That's all I can think of.

[shank]

hey now, he's a valuable contributor to this organization. . . .







hell, somebody's gotta keep the medical staff busy. . . .

otherwise they'd be more bored than a janitor at a treatment center for germaphobes.

[dogfish]

Two cool things Nate Jackson has done:


Dressed up as Santa Claus for Eddy Mac's kids.
Made fun of Sauerbrun constantly at camp.


That's all I can think of.


he came on the Bmania board and dissed you for your anti- nate jackson campaign-- i thought that was pretty funny. . . . :laugh:

[Requiem / The Dagda]

he came on the Bmania board and dissed you for your anti- nate jackson campaign-- i thought that was pretty funny. . . . :laugh:

What, are you serious? LOL.

[TXBRONC]

I've seen his hands, his speed, reminds me of Eddy Mac.

Don't be surprised if he ends up our number 2 receiver.

The guy can catch a ball like it's nobodies business. (hands like Scheff)

Especially in traffic.

Maybe if they move him back to wide receiver and he loses about 20 lbs. However I'm not aware of any plans to switch Nate from tight end back to wide receiver.

[BOSSHOGG30]

Nate Jackson:

After six NFL seasons, Jackson has proven to be a 'tweener who doesn't quite fit the mold at either wide receiver or tight end. He lacks the size and strength to be an effective in-line blocker aligned tight to formations, and he lacks the speed and explosiveness to line up and beat cornerbacks on the perimeter. He is very athletic and catches the ball very well, but he has trouble getting uncovered and separating from good man-to-man coverage. He has some special teams ability, but he isn't fast enough to make many plays in the open field.

I don't get this signing at all. Sometimes you have to wonder if coaches get attached to players. There are far better options if we need to keep another tightend on the roster.


Ben Troupe? Kris Wilson? Jeb Putzier? Bubba Franks? Bryan Fletcher, who is about the same size and has a lot more potential and brings more value to a team.

[Requiem / The Dagda]

My thoughts exactly BOSS. Welcome back.

[topscribe]

You missed my point. You talked about how they see something in him, and I talked about how they've "seen something" and made poor excuses in a myriad of situations; which emphasized their poor judgment.

In other words, you went off on a rant that has nothing to do with what I
said, after missing the point of what I said, anyway.

I give up, Dream. You can piss farther than I can.

End of this part of the discussion.

-----

[topscribe]

Nate Jackson:

After six NFL seasons, Jackson has proven to be a 'tweener who doesn't quite fit the mold at either wide receiver or tight end. He lacks the size and strength to be an effective in-line blocker aligned tight to formations, and he lacks the speed and explosiveness to line up and beat cornerbacks on the perimeter. He is very athletic and catches the ball very well, but he has trouble getting uncovered and separating from good man-to-man coverage. He has some special teams ability, but he isn't fast enough to make many plays in the open field.

I don't get this signing at all. Sometimes you have to wonder if coaches get attached to players. There are far better options if we need to keep another tightend on the roster.


Ben Troupe? Kris Wilson? Jeb Putzier? Bubba Franks? Bryan Fletcher, who is about the same size and has a lot more potential and brings more value to a team.

You may be right. All I said is that Jackson is tough in traffic, and they must
have seen something in him that caused them to re-sign him. That's all I
said. Nothing more. I said only that. I didn't say anything else. I made no
claims. I didn't talk about how he was the next Jerry Rice. I didn't attribute
a 4.4 time to him. Nothing like that. That is all.

BTW, I did not aim this at you, Boss, in case you are wondering. It's
amazing how I did not re-sign the guy, but someone has to go after me
about it. :tsk:

Thank you for your patience. ;) Now, back to the regularly scheduled program . . .

-----

[Requiem / The Dagda]

In other words, you went off on a rant that has nothing to do with what I
said, after missing the point of what I said, anyway.

You said they see something him that I don't because they know more than I ever will. I gave examples of how they've seen thing in things, and they turned out for bad. In my opinion, this is one of those situations. That's how it relates. I didn't miss the point at all.

Anyways, back to the Nate hate! :lol:

[shank]

I don't get this signing at all. Sometimes you have to wonder if coaches get attached to players.

how is shanny attached to nate and not jason?

[Stargazer]

Nate Jackson

2003: 1 game, 0 receptions
2004: 12 games, 8 receptions, 72 yards
2005: 2 games, 0 receptions
2006: 11 games, 5 receptions, 49 yards
2007: 5 games, 3 receptions, 34 yards, 1 TD

He turns 29 years old this June. We'll see what happens as he gets another opportunity this year.

[dogfish]

What, are you serious? LOL.


go back and check the thread, it was super awesome. . .

[Requiem / The Dagda]

go back and check the thread, it was super awesome. . .

My most recent one?

Some kid posted this:


dude, would you shut up already? I'm pro Nate Jackson and it just gets annoying when you put down a decent player all the time. He may not bwe the best but he's far from the worst and he has the ability to make some plays. If he gets released it will be because of his injury, not his talent.

LOL!

[dogfish]

My most recent one?


nah, your "release nate jackson movement" or whatever it was back on bmania. . .

[Requiem / The Dagda]

nah, your "release nate jackson movement" or whatever it was back on bmania. . .

He actually posted?

[Requiem / The Dagda]

ROFL!

OMG.

I never saw those posts before, LOL!

[shank]

ROFL!

OMG.

I never saw those posts before, LOL!

link?

[NameUsedBefore]

LINKS NOW :lol:

[Requiem / The Dagda]

He's RNJ?FU. (http://forums.denverbroncos.com/showthread.php?t=98305&page=3)

#33 and #44; and of course you can read through it all.

[dogfish]

ROFL!

OMG.

I never saw those posts before, LOL!


that's the ish, huh? i really believe that it was him-- who else would post that stuff? "never F with a man's money!"


:lol:

[NameUsedBefore]

That might have been him... I remember he wrote a lot for NFLE (IIRC) and that was kinda in tune with that writing style. Hilarious posts, though, especially the part about how if you link a bunch of random events together basically: Nate Jackson beat the Denver Broncos in the SuperBowl 55-10 :lol:

[Stargazer]

That might have been him... I remember he wrote a lot for NFLE (IIRC) and that was kinda in tune with that writing style. Hilarious posts, though, especially the part about how if you link a bunch of random events together basically: Nate Jackson beat the Denver Broncos in the SuperBowl 55-10 :lol:

But, we don't know if it was actually him...

[NameUsedBefore]

But, we don't know if it was actually him...

Nope, but it was still funny :D

[shank]

lol those are effing classic.

in my mind it was nate himself, and because of this, i hope he's a lifetime bronco lol. i wanna hear him bust a freestyle about dream's tardiness lol.

[Stargazer]

People act like signing Nate Jackson cost the team a ton of money, which he did not. I am all for bringing him back to compete.

[Dreadnought]

lol those are effing classic.

in my mind it was nate himself, and because of this, i hope he's a lifetime bronco lol. i wanna hear him bust a freestyle about dream's tardiness lol.

I've got to assume its him. Because of that, he is now a critical piece to the puzzle. I was only prepared to say earlier that it wasn't a bad signing because he works cheap and its low risk for the organization to let him compete and that he's a character guy. Now I believe he is the key to our future...