Down go the gators.

[kidrobinski]

Maybe the number of posts that seem to bother you so much is an indication that others think those topics are interesting to talk about?

Well let’s look at that, ‘interesting to talk about.’

Since Saturday's game, the drum beating from the board ‘realists’ has been:
-The OL sucks.
-The OL coach(s) suck.
-Shula sucks.
-Beamer (more subtle) sucks.
-Sellers is not putting up Heisman numbers, and therefore is not worthy of his praise.
-We are not worthy of a no 10 ranking.
-Those not of the ‘realist’ order have called the ‘realists’ names.
-The ‘realists’, in their wisdom, have prognosticated these maxims from the jump, and have fought the good fight against those who opposed them.

My question is why. Why is it ‘interesting’ to repeat these maxims ad nauseum to the board? Are the realists afraid that the board is not capable of or reliable enough to figure out on their own if any of the above maxims do indeed turn out to be apparent? Every single member of the board is aware that Saturday's performance was lackluster at best. Some of us have offered possible reasons for that and been stoned like Stephen himself for our blasphemy. In the eyes of the ‘realists’, the only possible reasons are those listed in the maxims above, and they’re making dimm sure everyone knows it. It’s what they find ‘interesting to talk about’ apparently. Were it not for the silly repetitiveness it wouldn’t be as cluttered. I’ve seen some say that it’s therapy for them; I’ll give them that.

Carry on.

 

[Gamecock Jacque]

Well let’s look at that, ‘interesting to talk about.’

Since Saturday's game, the drum beating from the board ‘realists’ has been:
-The OL sucks.
-The OL coach(s) suck.
-Shula sucks.
-Beamer (more subtle) sucks.
-Sellers is not putting up Heisman numbers, and therefore is not worthy of his praise.
-We are not worthy of a no 10 ranking.
-Those not of the ‘realist’ order have called the ‘realists’ names.
-The ‘realists’, in their wisdom, have prognosticated these maxims from the jump, and have fought the good fight against those who opposed them.

My question is why. Why is it ‘interesting’ to repeat these maxims ad nauseum to the board? Are the realists afraid that the board is not capable of or reliable enough to figure out on their own if any of the above maxims do indeed turn out to be apparent? Every single member of the board is aware that Saturday's performance was lackluster at best. Some of us have offered possible reasons for that and been stoned like Stephen himself for our blasphemy. In the eyes of the ‘realists’, the only possible reasons are those listed in the maxims above, and they’re making dimm sure everyone knows it. It’s what they find ‘interesting to talk about’ apparently. Were it not for the silly repetitiveness it wouldn’t be as cluttered. I’ve seen some say that it’s therapy for them; I’ll give them that.

Carry on.

The Insiders is chock full of people who sound just like you. I think you can try it out for $1 the first month. If you like it I'll just ask Shoe to bill me.

 

[Lurker123]

Well let’s look at that, ‘interesting to talk about.’

Since Saturday's game, the drum beating from the board ‘realists’ has been:
-The OL sucks.
-The OL coach(s) suck.
-Shula sucks.
-Beamer (more subtle) sucks.
-Sellers is not putting up Heisman numbers, and therefore is not worthy of his praise.
-We are not worthy of a no 10 ranking.
-Those not of the ‘realist’ order have called the ‘realists’ names.
-The ‘realists’, in their wisdom, have prognosticated these maxims from the jump, and have fought the good fight against those who opposed them.

My question is why. Why is it ‘interesting’ to repeat these maxims ad nauseum to the board? Are the realists afraid that the board is not capable of or reliable enough to figure out on their own if any of the above maxims do indeed turn out to be apparent? Every single member of the board is aware that Saturday's performance was lackluster at best. Some of us have offered possible reasons for that and been stoned like Stephen himself for our blasphemy. In the eyes of the ‘realists’, the only possible reasons are those listed in the maxims above, and they’re making dimm sure everyone knows it. It’s what they find ‘interesting to talk about’ apparently. Were it not for the silly repetitiveness it wouldn’t be as cluttered. I’ve seen some say that it’s therapy for them; I’ll give them that.

Carry on.

Didn't the OL suck though?
Hasn't the OL sucked going into year 3 of the OL coach's tenure while brininging in highly rated classes?
Shula definitely has a cloud of concern following him.
Haven't seen any "Beamer sucks". The closest was the argument of if hes limited in his hiring pool.
Sellers isn't putting up Heisman numbers. Is he?
Do we look like a top 10 team on the field?
There's been plenty of name calling on both sides.

So basically, it sounds like you dont want anyone discussing the team or program unless the topics fit your definition of appropriate. Because I see your list as actually pertinent topics to discuss.

Is your problem really that the "realists" are just stating the obvious? That doesn't strike me as so horrible.

As for the stoning analogy, you've taken part in quite a bit of that yourself. You've even turned around and then agreed with some posters you've done that to.

I guess if talking about the state of the program bothers you so much, why are you here?


Hopefully we rattle off 10 wins, but i doubt even that would stop many on here for hunting drama to complain about.

 

[Lurker123]

The Insiders is chock full of people who sound just like you. I think you can try it out for $1 the first month. If you like it I'll just ask Shoe to bill me.

Ask for the Madden kid. He's really smart, just ask him. His friends who are really football savvy tell him so.

 

[Gamecock Jacque]

Didn't the OL suck though?
Hasn't the OL sucked going into year 3 of the OL coach's tenure while brininging in highly rated classes?
Shula definitely has a cloud of concern following him.
Haven't seen any "Beamer sucks". The closest was the argument of if hes limited in his hiring pool.
Sellers isn't putting up Heisman numbers. Is he?
Do we look like a top 10 team on the field?
There's been plenty of name calling on both sides.

So basically, it sounds like you dont want anyone discussing the team or program unless the topics fit your definition of appropriate. Because I see your list as actually pertinent topics to discuss.

Is your problem really that the "realists" are just stating the obvious? That doesn't strike me as so horrible.

As for the stoning analogy, you've taken part in quite a bit of that yourself. You've even turned around and then agreed with some posters you've done that to.

I guess if talking about the state of the program bothers you so much, why are you here?


Hopefully we rattle off 10 wins, but i doubt even that would stop many on here for hunting drama to complain about.

Well, he DID say Carry On.

 

[Cock2Death]

Heat's back on Napier

25 on cash app he is done , They're just waiting for one more single Debacle like saturday !

 

[kidrobinski]

Didn't the OL suck though?
Hasn't the OL sucked going into year 3 of the OL coach's tenure while brininging in highly rated classes?
Shula definitely has a cloud of concern following him.
Haven't seen any "Beamer sucks". The closest was the argument of if hes limited in his hiring pool.
Sellers isn't putting up Heisman numbers. Is he?
Do we look like a top 10 team on the field?
There's been plenty of name calling on both sides.

So basically, it sounds like you dont want anyone discussing the team or program unless the topics fit your definition of appropriate. Because I see your list as actually pertinent topics to discuss.

Is your problem really that the "realists" are just stating the obvious? That doesn't strike me as so horrible.

As for the stoning analogy, you've taken part in quite a bit of that yourself. You've even turned around and then agreed with some posters you've done that to.

I guess if talking about the state of the program bothers you so much, why are you here?


Hopefully we rattle off 10 wins, but i doubt even that would stop many on here for hunting drama to complain about.

Lol.

How about Harbor; so far two balls right thru his hands. No suckage?

Adaway is demonstrating difficulties picking up blitzes. Fred Johnson (a beast and a bright spot) overpursues on the reg. Murph has misread his coverage at least twice that I saw, almost resulting in picks. No suckage?

No? Part of the game you say? Carry on.

 

[Lurker123]

Lol.

How about Harbor; so far two balls right thru his hands. No suckage?

Adaway is demonstrating difficulties picking up blitzes. Fred Johnson (a beast and a bright spot) overpursues on the reg. Murph has misread his coverage at least twice that I saw, almost resulting in picks. No suckage?

No? Part of the game you say? Carry on.

So, you're kind of all over the place. You don't want people complaining, but are now complaining that people aren't complaining about other topics that you think should be complained about.

You do you, I guess.

The rest of us will just keep talking about what's going on with the team. You sit back and cry.

 

[Gamecock Jacque]

So, you're kind of all over the place. You don't want people complaining, but are now complaining that people aren't complaining about other topics that you think should be complained about.

You do you, I guess.

The rest of us will just keep talking about what's going on with the team. You sit back and cry.

He's not a serious football fan. Serious fans discuss what they see. He doesn't want us to. In fact it seems to make him mad.

 

[Lurker123]

He's not a serious football fan. Serious fans discuss what they see. He doesn't want us to. In fact it seems to make him mad.

It is weird that some people feel the need to police what topics are allowed to be discussed.