• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

KanhojiAngre's Playground

KanhojiAngre said:
How true. Kiel's not likely to be a WR though. Maybe he'll make him a tight end or defensive end lol.

Looking at recent NFL draft results, it's hard to see a real pattern of programs that do a consistently good job developing NFL QBs other than USC. Auburn has a couple, Purdue has had a couple, Florida, Texas not surprisingly. California had Boller and Rodgers but nothing since. Kind of wonder if great QBs aren't most often made before they get to college rather than molded once they get there. Otherwise wouldn't you expect to see a greater concentration of them under certain coaches? Just a thought.

I know if Miles has a real QB and shows an ability to use him with the talent they have had outside the QB position the last few years, they could be historically good.
Click to expand...

Miles makes Kiel into a MLB. Wins Butkus and 3 MNCs. Miles flies off into sky.

It's hard to believe David Cutcliffe is the reason the Mannings are so good. Same with Lloyd Carr and Tom Brady. It really is a crapshoot as to the talent that translates to the NFL.
 
Hello said:
Miles makes Kiel into a MLB. Wins Butkus and 3 MNCs. Miles flies off into sky.

It's hard to believe David Cutcliffe is the reason the Mannings are so good. Same with Lloyd Carr and Tom Brady. It really is a crapshoot as to the talent that translates to the NFL.
Click to expand...

I think at some positions that require more development, coaching might matter more but it's probably usually the position coaching or at least DC. I don't think it's an accident that Nebraska used to take a bunch of farmboys and make them into NFL offensive linemen. Of course, cattle grade steroids might have been involved, but hey, all part of the program.

West Virginia had quite a good record under Nehlen of developing linemen as well, especially relative to recruiting prestige at that time and the NFL players they developed at other positions (that is, not very many at all). But it could also be true that that advantage was a result of being ahead of the curve in strength training, and that advantage doesn't really exist anymore.

It would be interesting to see if you followed coaches' careers if there was any correlations to be drawn, and what they were. Joe Tiller probably outperformed his level at Purdue with respect to QBs. Probably another guy that was ahead of the curve and an advantage that's gone now.
 
Eagles_Legendz said:
Go read what Bachmann said about Sorenson and Paul.
Click to expand...

She's desperate, and a loon, and going to fail in her kinda home state. She probably won't have a campaign by the time Bama and LSU play.

And, of course, she hates Muslims. Fucking Santorum may caucus ahead of Bachmann though. It's that bad for her.

Btw, the CNN/Time poll is junk. Absolutely no way Santorum has 16%. PPP (D) makes more sense IMO. Iowa's an open caucus, so including independents in the polling mix is logical. PPP took a shot at CNN/Time on twitter to that effect, saying if they only polled Republicans they'd also have Romney ahead, but them's not the rules of the game in Iowa.
 
Yep, CNN's poll is basically worthless since ~25% of the expected voters are supposed to be independents/democrats. I'm expecting Paul to win Iowa by 3 or 4 points, Mitt to win NH rather handily, and Gingrich to probably take SC. After that it gets interesting. I think if Santorum actually gets 13-15% in Iowa, Bachmann probably bows out and Perry may soon after that. Huntsman is going to need to perform in NH as well to be viable. If he doesn't, I think it wouldn't be shocking to have only Romney/Paul/Gingrich/Santorum left after Florida.
 
Eagles_Legendz said:
Yep, CNN's poll is basically worthless since ~25% of the expected voters are supposed to be independents/democrats. I'm expecting Paul to win Iowa by 3 or 4 points, Mitt to win NH rather handily, and Gingrich to probably take SC. After that it gets interesting. I think if Santorum actually gets 13-15% in Iowa, Bachmann probably bows out and Perry may soon after that. Huntsman is going to need to perform in NH as well to be viable. If he doesn't, I think it wouldn't be shocking to have only Romney/Paul/Gingrich/Santorum left after Florida.
Click to expand...

Pretty much agree.

Paul wins Iowa unless the Iowa GOP finds a way to screw him out of it. There is some Paul support on the Central Committee, though a minority, and Paul has said his campaign has a plan to ensure confidence in the vote, but he has to say that. The IAGOP announced they're moving their vote counting offsite because of the Anonymous foolishness, so that's not without concern. But he should win it and could be by more than the polls suggest.

Huntsman can burn money so I think he may stay in a bit, but doubtful he's in it by Super Tuesday.

But yeah; Romney in NH and a 2nd would be good there. Gingrich has to win SC to stay in the race and I think there's a good chance he does. If he wins Florida -- the only early winner-take-all state IIRC as of now anyway -- he could well sweep the south (not counting VA, where as of now he's not on the ballot, and of course TX).
 
Kanhoji, any thoughts on Ron Paul's former staffers hatchet job in right-wing news or whatever it was that got linked on the RJ board?
 
TuffaloDeac10 said:
Kanhoji, any thoughts on Ron Paul's former staffers hatchet job in right-wing news or whatever it was that got linked on the RJ board?
Click to expand...

Huh? Do you mean Bachmann's former staffer that switched to Paul? If not, I don't think I know what you're talking about.
 
TuffaloDeac10 said:
http://rightwingnews.com/election-2...on-paul-staffer-on-newsletters-anti-semitism/
Click to expand...

Well from such an obviously centrist site as right-wing news, I for one am shocked to see something like this. :)

Even at that, it sure seems like if someone is trying to make something out of this, they're not gonna get much.

"Is Paul a racist?" No.
"Is Paul an anti-Semite?" No.
"Is Paul bigoted toward homosexuals?" No. He supports their right to do what they want with their lives.
Ok then, great. Really broke ground there.

It seems like the guy says all of the above, but yet wants to make the case that he's "uncomfortable" or "out of touch". His message of preserving and returning power to the people should appeal to open-minded people of all races. He doesn't need to know what's on Telemundo or BET to carry that message credibly to people of all races. It's a real laugh seeing someone attacked for being "out of touch" with Blacks and Hispanics among this primary field. I'm sure Mitt Romney are Newt Gingrich are intimately in touch with the minority community. Right. Maybe Newt's fooled around on one of his wives with a black chick or something.

I enjoy how the guy feels the need to capitalize the word gay.

I wrote a bunch more addressing issue-by-issue what the guy brings up, but then I realized that his points aren't really worth it and it's probably more than you really care to read in refuting what he says. If you have a specific issue you're wondering about, feel free to ask.
 
I was interested in your thoughts more in a general sense. Didn't take much away from it (while intending to vote for Paul, he certainly makes me really uncomfortable on a number of fronts) because I'm already aware that Paul has some baggage. As long as that baggage isn't being bought and paid for by lobbies, I'm ok with it.
 
TuffaloDeac10 said:
I was interested in your thoughts more in a general sense. Didn't take much away from it (while intending to vote for Paul, he certainly makes me really uncomfortable on a number of fronts) because I'm already aware that Paul has some baggage. As long as that baggage isn't being bought and paid for by lobbies, I'm ok with it.
Click to expand...

My thoughts in a general sense are summed up in the title of a Shakespeare comedy set in Messina.
 
deacvision7 said:
Maxi doesn't play and Kuyt gets 16 minutes. Liverpool wins 3-1.
Click to expand...

You've made no excuses so I won't berate or gloat about today's result.

Wins like Rovers got today are IMO why they'll manage to stay up. They can score -- 8 games with 1+ goals in the PL -- and scoring more goals means they stand a better chance at getting 3 points on occasion. They are 3-3-7 when the Yak starts.
 
Despite today's shocking result, I still cannot see Blackburn staying up. I would be quite surprised if they didn't finish this season bottom.
 
deacvision7 said:
Despite today's shocking result, I still cannot see Blackburn staying up. I would be quite surprised if they didn't finish this season bottom.
Click to expand...

And we shall see. One to keep in your pocket: the only team to be relegated with a 20+ goal scorer in the PL is 04-05 Crystal Palace. Johnson scored 21 of the team's 41 that year; Yak has not quite that share for Rovers (12 of 28 now), though he does have more than half their goals in games he's played, I believe.

Palace has never managed to avoid relegation from the PL, so I don't know if it's fair to put Blackburn in that category, but if Yak gets to 20, that's the model for how they could get relegated, pretty much.
 
Wonder how much Chelsea will spend in the window trying to make sure they stay top 4.

Wow David Luiz is stupid.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top