(08-18-2014 09:11 PM)armour248 Wrote:  

(08-18-2014 09:05 PM)MaddDawgz02 Wrote:  Its just frustrating isn't it? There are going to be plenty of flaws with this team, but you can avoid self-inflicted ones, this is self-inflicted.

Good god.

Legit LAUGHED ALOUD at armour's reaction to MD....


Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

(08-18-2014 09:09 PM)clcfball11 Wrote:  RE: the QBs...

The Carey clip made me feel better, actually. I get the impression the coaches see 3 guys they can win with. Those talking about Maddie being the explosive guy are right on. I doubt Lynch looked great throwing the ball in practice either in 2012 camp, and I'm sure they remember that. We've seen what a dynamic, fast QB can do with this offense and I don't blame the coaches for salivating at the potential.

On the other hand are McIntosh and Hare. I'd say if there's one guy I'm least confident in it might be McIntosh, simply because it was his job to lose and he hasn't really taken it as his. Hare is probably a good college QB, but I'm not sure he fits the offense.

Here's hoping Maddie figures it out.

some excellent points made here.....I really thought McIntosh would win the job (and maybe that will happen), but Maddie may have the coaches thinking "we did it with Lynch, why not this dude?"

According to HuskieWire Carey wants to make a QB by this Thursday when they start prepping for the Hoes. So there's that.

(08-18-2014 09:07 PM)HuskieJWN Wrote:  

(08-18-2014 09:03 PM)PrideinthePack Wrote:  

(08-18-2014 09:00 PM)HuskieJWN Wrote:  

(08-18-2014 08:57 PM)PrideinthePack Wrote:  The world is ending was the hyperbole.

That's not a fact.

Depends on your definition of ending. Every day moves closer to the end.

The phrase was used because people like MD and others are saying NIU is totally screwed and acting as if the world is ending. They aren't using logic or fact in their thoughts they're just being total pessimists. Pessimists tend to believe the world is collapsing.

In regards to the QB situation which you used, it's not ending. Therefore...hyperbole.

And nobody else uses hyperbole? You miss the entire point, per usual.

You missed the point by trying to mask your "Depends on your definition of ending. Every day moves closer to the end." post. That makes no sense when you take into account it having to have direct correlation to the QB situation for it to be consistent with your previous post. It was a scatter-brain post that doesn't make sense.

I'm not even sure you know what hyperbole means.

PM me if you want me to teach you in a less embarrassing setting.

(08-18-2014 04:04 PM)MaddDawgz02 Wrote:  

(08-18-2014 04:01 PM)timxlydon Wrote:  

(08-18-2014 03:58 PM)7 Wrote:  

(08-18-2014 03:53 PM)timxlydon Wrote:  

(08-18-2014 03:49 PM)7 Wrote:  Yeah, again, I think this is the most logical explanation of what's going on.

Then why haven't they named him starter? Teams already know the Huskies are going to run with the QB, so it's not like they are tricking anyone.

I truly believe it has a lot to do with the unknown of the QB running game. Now, the counter arguement to that would be to make the QBs live at some point in practice, which while very unorthodox would seem to be a valid point to me.

I just think they all to different things well. They're very different QBs. Hare the thrower, Maddie the runner, McIntosh the mix of the two. So they want to get them out there with live bullets running the full offense and see what happens.

This is giving me a headache. I'm going binge drinking, wake me up on the 28th.

The thing I hate is you are conceding the NU game with this decision, there is no question about that. It may not ultimately hurt the MAC picture overall, but you are giving up on the NU game.

Ahh, yes, the inevitable "no question about that"-post from Maddawg. Remember when the MAC race was shot to s#*t in August 2012 when Logan Pegram went down? There was no question about that. Remember when Casey Weston wasn't given the nod at starter (even though he sucked monkey balls)? The offense wouldn't be able to go, no question about that.

Funny story: I was in the middle of getting frustrated trying to explain the concept of "option" in a post to Maddawg, and a former NIU player of recent vintage came by and wanted to know why I was all pissy. I explained that I was arguing with Maddawg on the message board, who didn't know his ass from a hole in the ground. Now, this guy never posts here, but he obviously is familiar with the board (as are all the players). His only response was a laugh and to say, "Who is that f*^&in' guy? Is he even real?"

So, it ain't just me.

(08-19-2014 07:03 AM)cawoo22 Wrote:  

(08-18-2014 04:04 PM)MaddDawgz02 Wrote:  

(08-18-2014 04:01 PM)timxlydon Wrote:  

(08-18-2014 03:58 PM)7 Wrote:  

(08-18-2014 03:53 PM)timxlydon Wrote:  Then why haven't they named him starter? Teams already know the Huskies are going to run with the QB, so it's not like they are tricking anyone.

I truly believe it has a lot to do with the unknown of the QB running game. Now, the counter arguement to that would be to make the QBs live at some point in practice, which while very unorthodox would seem to be a valid point to me.

I just think they all to different things well. They're very different QBs. Hare the thrower, Maddie the runner, McIntosh the mix of the two. So they want to get them out there with live bullets running the full offense and see what happens.

This is giving me a headache. I'm going binge drinking, wake me up on the 28th.

The thing I hate is you are conceding the NU game with this decision, there is no question about that. It may not ultimately hurt the MAC picture overall, but you are giving up on the NU game.

Ahh, yes, the inevitable "no question about that"-post from Maddawg. Remember when the MAC race was shot to s#*t in August 2012 when Logan Pegram went down? There was no question about that. Remember when Casey Weston wasn't given the nod at starter [/b](even though he sucked monkey balls)[b]? The offense wouldn't be able to go, no question about that.

Funny story: I was in the middle of getting frustrated trying to explain the concept of "option" in a post to Maddawg, and a former NIU player of recent vintage came by and wanted to know why I was all pissy. I explained that I was arguing with Maddawg on the message board, who didn't know his ass from a hole in the ground. Now, this guy never posts here, but he obviously is familiar with the board (as are all the players). His only response was a laugh and to say, "Who is that f*^&in' guy? Is he even real?"

So, it ain't just me.

Can you verify this fact?

(08-19-2014 12:41 AM)PrideinthePack Wrote:  

(08-18-2014 09:07 PM)HuskieJWN Wrote:  

(08-18-2014 09:03 PM)PrideinthePack Wrote:  

(08-18-2014 09:00 PM)HuskieJWN Wrote:  

(08-18-2014 08:57 PM)PrideinthePack Wrote:  The world is ending was the hyperbole.

That's not a fact.

Depends on your definition of ending. Every day moves closer to the end.

The phrase was used because people like MD and others are saying NIU is totally screwed and acting as if the world is ending. They aren't using logic or fact in their thoughts they're just being total pessimists. Pessimists tend to believe the world is collapsing.

In regards to the QB situation which you used, it's not ending. Therefore...hyperbole.

And nobody else uses hyperbole? You miss the entire point, per usual.

You missed the point by trying to mask your "Depends on your definition of ending. Every day moves closer to the end." post. That makes no sense when you take into account it having to have direct correlation to the QB situation for it to be consistent with your previous post. It was a scatter-brain post that doesn't make sense.

I'm not even sure you know what hyperbole means.

PM me if you want me to teach you in a less embarrassing setting.

You're an idiot. I responded with the depends on your definition of ending because you said the world isn't ending is a fact.

However, scientists have factually said the world is ending. The world will end and is currently in the process of it.

I said the line exaggerating (same as hyperbole) because people on here are having heart attacks (again exaggerating) about eh QB situation when there still is time to have it sorted out.

If you say something is fact and I prove you wrong, which I did, it probably isn't scatterbrained. Oh and you "embarrassing" me on the Internet is so terrifying. I couldn't care less. There are tons of idiots on the Internet and we're all bound to be wrong more than once, but I'd say I'm one of the more logical ones when it come to actual football knowledge.

(08-19-2014 07:30 AM)klake87 Wrote:  

(08-19-2014 07:03 AM)cawoo22 Wrote:  

(08-18-2014 04:04 PM)MaddDawgz02 Wrote:  

(08-18-2014 04:01 PM)timxlydon Wrote:  

(08-18-2014 03:58 PM)7 Wrote:  I truly believe it has a lot to do with the unknown of the QB running game. Now, the counter arguement to that would be to make the QBs live at some point in practice, which while very unorthodox would seem to be a valid point to me.

I just think they all to different things well. They're very different QBs. Hare the thrower, Maddie the runner, McIntosh the mix of the two. So they want to get them out there with live bullets running the full offense and see what happens.

This is giving me a headache. I'm going binge drinking, wake me up on the 28th.

The thing I hate is you are conceding the NU game with this decision, there is no question about that. It may not ultimately hurt the MAC picture overall, but you are giving up on the NU game.

Ahh, yes, the inevitable "no question about that"-post from Maddawg. Remember when the MAC race was shot to s#*t in August 2012 when Logan Pegram went down? There was no question about that. Remember when Casey Weston wasn't given the nod at starter [/b](even though he sucked monkey balls)[b]? The offense wouldn't be able to go, no question about that.

Funny story: I was in the middle of getting frustrated trying to explain the concept of "option" in a post to Maddawg, and a former NIU player of recent vintage came by and wanted to know why I was all pissy. I explained that I was arguing with Maddawg on the message board, who didn't know his ass from a hole in the ground. Now, this guy never posts here, but he obviously is familiar with the board (as are all the players). His only response was a laugh and to say, "Who is that f*^&in' guy? Is he even real?"

So, it ain't just me.

Can you verify this fact?

Sadly, no. I guess I have to retract that. Although I won't go as far as to say there is no question about that.

(08-19-2014 08:42 AM)HuskieJWN Wrote:  

(08-19-2014 12:41 AM)PrideinthePack Wrote:  

(08-18-2014 09:07 PM)HuskieJWN Wrote:  

(08-18-2014 09:03 PM)PrideinthePack Wrote:  

(08-18-2014 09:00 PM)HuskieJWN Wrote:  Depends on your definition of ending. Every day moves closer to the end.

The phrase was used because people like MD and others are saying NIU is totally screwed and acting as if the world is ending. They aren't using logic or fact in their thoughts they're just being total pessimists. Pessimists tend to believe the world is collapsing.

In regards to the QB situation which you used, it's not ending. Therefore...hyperbole.

And nobody else uses hyperbole? You miss the entire point, per usual.

You missed the point by trying to mask your "Depends on your definition of ending. Every day moves closer to the end." post. That makes no sense when you take into account it having to have direct correlation to the QB situation for it to be consistent with your previous post. It was a scatter-brain post that doesn't make sense.

I'm not even sure you know what hyperbole means.

PM me if you want me to teach you in a less embarrassing setting.

You're an idiot. I responded with the depends on your definition of ending because you said the world isn't ending is a fact.

However, scientists have factually said the world is ending. The world will end and is currently in the process of it.

I said the line exaggerating (same as hyperbole) because people on here are having heart attacks (again exaggerating) about eh QB situation when there still is time to have it sorted out.

If you say something is fact and I prove you wrong, which I did, it probably isn't scatterbrained. Oh and you "embarrassing" me on the Internet is so terrifying. I couldn't care less. There are tons of idiots on the Internet and we're all bound to be wrong more than once, but I'd say I'm one of the more logical ones when it come to actual football knowledge.

Again...the world ending is regards to the QB situation isn't a fact no matter how many times you say it. That's the hyperbole. This is where you're confused.

Someone want to help this guy? He couldn't be more lost if I dropped him in the middle of the Sahel.

I don't feel the world is ending because of the QB situation. I just find it hard to believe that 3 quarterbacks are that close in ability and potential.

Yeah that discussion got way too deep for no reason at all.

QB Apocalypse 2014

It'll lighten up once football actually starts.

(08-19-2014 08:51 AM)PrideinthePack Wrote:  

(08-19-2014 08:42 AM)HuskieJWN Wrote:  

(08-19-2014 12:41 AM)PrideinthePack Wrote:  

(08-18-2014 09:07 PM)HuskieJWN Wrote:  

(08-18-2014 09:03 PM)PrideinthePack Wrote:  In regards to the QB situation which you used, it's not ending. Therefore...hyperbole.

And nobody else uses hyperbole? You miss the entire point, per usual.

You missed the point by trying to mask your "Depends on your definition of ending. Every day moves closer to the end." post. That makes no sense when you take into account it having to have direct correlation to the QB situation for it to be consistent with your previous post. It was a scatter-brain post that doesn't make sense.

I'm not even sure you know what hyperbole means.

PM me if you want me to teach you in a less embarrassing setting.

You're an idiot. I responded with the depends on your definition of ending because you said the world isn't ending is a fact.

However, scientists have factually said the world is ending. The world will end and is currently in the process of it.

I said the line exaggerating (same as hyperbole) because people on here are having heart attacks (again exaggerating) about eh QB situation when there still is time to have it sorted out.

If you say something is fact and I prove you wrong, which I did, it probably isn't scatterbrained. Oh and you "embarrassing" me on the Internet is so terrifying. I couldn't care less. There are tons of idiots on the Internet and we're all bound to be wrong more than once, but I'd say I'm one of the more logical ones when it come to actual football knowledge.

Again...the world ending is regards to the QB situation isn't a fact no matter how many times you say it. That's the hyperbole. This is where you're confused.

Someone want to help this guy? He couldn't be more lost if I dropped him in the middle of the Sahel.

Can you not read? I admitted I used the term while exaggerating because MD was acting like it. In regards to football I specifically said it's exaggeration.

You still don't understand that the world ending is not a fact as a direct result of the QB competition. You proved no one wrong because your fact isn't a fact.

Say you're wrong. Say it.

(08-19-2014 10:13 AM)PrideinthePack Wrote:  You still don't understand that the world ending is not a fact as a direct result of the QB competition. You proved no one wrong because your fact isn't a fact.

Say you're wrong. Say it.

OH MY GOD HE WASN'T BEING SERIOUS AHHHHHHHH

(08-19-2014 10:13 AM)PrideinthePack Wrote:  You still don't understand that the world ending is not a fact as a direct result of the QB competition. You proved no one wrong because your fact isn't a fact.

Say you're wrong. Say it.

Dude, the world is really ending (fact). Is it ending because of the QB competition, NO. Are people acting like the world was ending because of it?(some, yes).

I never said the world is ending because the QB competition is fact. I said it in hyperbole. I said the world is ending in fact, because you made a blanket statement saying it wasn't, then tried to backtrack and act like you were saying it's not endin because of the QB battle.

You never fully comprehended the difference in the two that I actually pointed out. (Multiple times, and again in this post)

If we run out of hotdogs again this year, the world will end. Or if Barksdale transfers out.

(08-19-2014 10:20 AM)HuskieJWN Wrote:  

(08-19-2014 10:13 AM)PrideinthePack Wrote:  You still don't understand that the world ending is not a fact as a direct result of the QB competition. You proved no one wrong because your fact isn't a fact.

Say you're wrong. Say it.

Dude, the world is really ending (fact). Is it ending because of the QB competition, NO. Are people acting like the world was ending because of it?(some, yes).

I never said the world is ending because the QB competition is fact. I said it in hyperbole. I said the world is ending in fact, because you made a blanket statement saying it wasn't, then tried to backtrack and act like you were saying it's not endin because of the QB battle.

You never fully comprehended the difference in the two that I actually pointed out. (Multiple times, and again in this post)

You could have stopped typing after saying NO. The rest is scatterbrain thought. Ugh...and you started out so well.

(08-19-2014 10:32 AM)PrideinthePack Wrote:  

(08-19-2014 10:20 AM)HuskieJWN Wrote:  

(08-19-2014 10:13 AM)PrideinthePack Wrote:  You still don't understand that the world ending is not a fact as a direct result of the QB competition. You proved no one wrong because your fact isn't a fact.

Say you're wrong. Say it.

Dude, the world is really ending (fact). Is it ending because of the QB competition, NO. Are people acting like the world was ending because of it?(some, yes).

I never said the world is ending because the QB competition is fact. I said it in hyperbole. I said the world is ending in fact, because you made a blanket statement saying it wasn't, then tried to backtrack and act like you were saying it's not endin because of the QB battle.

You never fully comprehended the difference in the two that I actually pointed out. (Multiple times, and again in this post)

You could have stopped typing after saying NO. The rest is scatterbrain thought. Ugh...and you started out so well.

I had really high hopes for him too....