Let's be honest and stop candy coating it...Horvath sucked last year. Plain and simple you don't throw more INTs than TDs and call it a good year. Look at a silver lining all you want, but if you guys want to support phil based on last season you are nuts!

What you have to do is listen to what everyone is saying, listen to what the coaches have said, Phil wants this job and it sounds like he went out there and took it with hard work.

The problem with the negativity towards phil...It will still be there if he has an awful game, but this is because there IS TALENT BEHIND HIM. The positives of having 2 QBs is that in case of an injury you are going to be ok...but the negatives, in case of poor preformance people will start talking.

Dan, I assume that you don't support anything else in your life with blind faith, so why start with the huskies? One can be a fan and let a player who isn't doing well have it as well. It's something I like to call Cubsitis. If people don't get upset or voice displeasure when things aren't going well what would force a change?

You are a very political guy, i don't see why you go soft on the Huskies and phil horvath and hard on everything else.

NIUGAMBLER Wrote:Let's be honest and stop candy coating it...Horvath sucked last year. Plain and simple you don't throw more INTs than TDs and call it a good year. Look at a silver lining all you want, but if you guys want to support phil based on last season you are nuts!

What you have to do is listen to what everyone is saying, listen to what the coaches have said, Phil wants this job and it sounds like he went out there and took it with hard work.

The problem with the negativity towards phil...It will still be there if he has an awful game, but this is because there IS TALENT BEHIND HIM. The positives of having 2 QBs is that in case of an injury you are going to be ok...but the negatives, in case of poor preformance people will start talking.

Dan, I assume that you don't support anything else in your life with blind faith, so why start with the huskies? One can be a fan and let a player who isn't doing well have it as well. It's something I like to call Cubsitis. If people don't get upset or voice displeasure when things aren't going well what would force a change?

You are a very political guy, i don't see why you go soft on the Huskies and phil horvath and hard on everything else.

I don't see everything entirely as black or white. So I can't say "Phil sucked last year", because I don't believe that. He nearly led us to wins at Maryland and Iowa St (lost by a total of 10pts), despite each being pumped by those teams as "revenge games" for losses to a non-BCS team in '03. Granted, he was far from perfect, but neither was Haldi in early '02 - he threw what could have been a very key late INT against Wake, but the D stepped up and Azar hit a FG at the buzzer to go to OT; Haldi couldn't generate anything at USF; Haldi was responsible for 3 TOs at Wisconsin, which can easily be blamed for our loss up there. I blame much of Phil's problems last year on inexperience, not "sucking". To say that he had a horrible year, given his circumstances of zero experience and being thrown in unexpectedly due to Haldi's injury, is wrong, IMO. He had flashes just like Josh did his first year, and he made mistakes just like a young QB will likely make. So was did he really "suck", or did he just not set the world on fire?

That said, I've been told by people that know a lot more about football than either of us that Davis and Nicholson have more physical talent than any QBs we've had in 10 years. I'd love to see us with a true playmaker at QB - a guy that scares you. But I'm going to defer to the guys that know a lot more about this team and these players than I, and accept that the person trotted out there will have looked like the best choice based on a lot more observation than I have been able to do. If that is Phil, I know it will be because he's looked good, not because he's looked the least bad. He's shown he can do good things if he eliminates the mistakes, and generally you see people do so with experience - we'll never know if Phil has eliminated the mistakes until he gets out there.

I don't know that I'm more political on the Huskies than other things, I just have a lot of faith in these guys and know that pretty much everyone here hasn't spent the time with this team that this staff has. I always find certain opinions about certain players from casual fans to be laughable - having the opinion based on what you've seen is fine, but assuming that you know something that the coaches don't is a laugh riot (note - I'm not talking specifically just about you, Gambler).

My only problem with your post is comparing Phil Horvath to Josh Haldi. They aren't the same guys, with the same team nor the same physical ability. Phil is probably not as gifted as josh (who ran a 4.6 40!) and phil probably isn't going to have his intangibles. Does that mean he is going to be bad? No. But just based on his preformance on the field...he was bad. I don't care if it was his first start, or 40th start, he is the starting qb of a D1 school, he has to have some talent. Now all of that being said about how bad phil was he may play better, but there is a good shot of him being worse. Does he have sheldon this year? Big Brad? So 2 big 'bail out' guys aren't there.

The point of it all is that Phil really is going to earn this starting job based on preformance and just hard work in the off season, not on how he did last year. More INTs than TDs...and the points off turnovers are pretty high i think its safe to say. Would britt davis be better qb on this team that isn't going to have 2 safety valves and would maybe need the qb to make a play with his feet on 3rd down? he sure would be. But the first 2 downs phil horvath can pilot this team probably as well or better than either nicholson or davis.

And lastly I just don't see where you get off saying that some people have less vaild points than you, for the simple fact that you don't agree with them. A lot of posters had a voice in a thread called "Horvath is terrible" started by Huskie Mike, yet you continue to try and pick on one poster. I hate to say this dan but your opinions are as worthless as all of ours.

Do you guys remember how Horvath was regarding come out of high school, was he highly regarded? I want to say he was considered a great signing at the time.

I dont have much expertise when it comes to football as I didnt play it in high school or anything. But I just feel if Horvath made some tweaks to his mechanics he would be lethal. I also took some time to watch some of the old games from last year in anticipation of this year and something I noticed about Horvath is that when he threw down the middle of the field the ball just seemed to sail on him. Then I watched his release and he opens up his chest to the receiver far too early so when he throws the ball, he is using all arm and no upper body which I bet has alot to say for some poor accuracy at times. Also when MLB's see him open up like this, its pretty obvious where he is going with the ball. Again I have no credentials to speak about this, but I just thought it was real obvious from watching him where you didnt need a degree in football to see it. Its probably a mechanical flaw he could get away with in HS, but I hope he has that straightend out.

I think more of his problems were with a lack of arm strength last year. He couldn't make the throws he had to on a line, thus they were kind of soft and easier to knock down/pick off. But from all reports phil is bigger and stronger this year and I look forward to seeing his improved zip on the ball.

NIUGAMBLER Wrote:I think more of his problems were with a lack of arm strength last year. He couldn't make the throws he had to on a line, thus they were kind of soft and easier to knock down/pick off. But from all reports phil is bigger and stronger this year and I look forward to seeing his improved zip on the ball.

Exactly gambler! But I think a big part of this is a mechanical issue. Did you notice he had a lot more zip on the ball to the sidelines, he did a better job of staying closed up longer on the sideline patterns, but when he threw down the middle and opens up his chest like that, there is nothing left to throw with besides all arm. Only an arm like Favre could throw a bullet from the position Horvath put himself in.

Good lord I sound like a hawk harrelson wannabe!

Well i'm not sure about a 'brett farve' being needed for that. Phil has to open up to throw the ball to the middle, so i'm not exactly sure what it is you see that makes him mechanically unsound. But I'm pretty sure whatever it is you are right, just for the simple fact it's hard for me to accept that a top 50 qb recruit like phil was would have that big of a problem physically completing passes.

NIUGAMBLER Wrote:My only problem with your post is comparing Phil Horvath to Josh Haldi. They aren't the same guys, with the same team nor the same physical ability. Phil is probably not as gifted as josh (who ran a 4.6 40!) and phil probably isn't going to have his intangibles. Does that mean he is going to be bad? No. But just based on his preformance on the field...he was bad. I don't care if it was his first start, or 40th start, he is the starting qb of a D1 school, he has to have some talent. Now all of that being said about how bad phil was he may play better, but there is a good shot of him being worse. Does he have sheldon this year? Big Brad? So 2 big 'bail out' guys aren't there.

The point of it all is that Phil really is going to earn this starting job based on preformance and just hard work in the off season, not on how he did last year. More INTs than TDs...and the points off turnovers are pretty high i think its safe to say. Would britt davis be better qb on this team that isn't going to have 2 safety valves and would maybe need the qb to make a play with his feet on 3rd down? he sure would be. But the first 2 downs phil horvath can pilot this team probably as well or better than either nicholson or davis.

This is a valid point. NOBODY KNOWS how the kids are going to play under fire, though we have seen some of what Phil *could* do - he improved over the course of his starting gigs. As to earning the job off of last year - of course the coaches are going to play him because he played last year and only that; of course he's had to earn it.

I only compare him to Josh because they both appear to be managers rather than stud QBs and each struggled in their first few starts yet showed flashes.

A cynic could easily point out that being a 4th year player gives him a hell of a lot more time to know the system and thus he simply looks the least worst due to his competitor's lack of experience. Without being privy to practice observation, I can't say that for sure.

But you also don't blow off the kid because we don't appear to have the same group of WRs - if Powers, Hurd and the rest of the group can't catch that's not Phil's fault (assuming of course that every ball is not 20 feet over the WR's heads). If we had no one out wide, I can see sticking a runner at QB to try for a scramble on certain downs, but I don't think you're going to see much of this strategy. Besides that, I personally think that we have plenty of players that *can* make plays at WR, we just need them to step up. IMO, the coaches will not make the QB decision based on whether the WRs can get open and catch the ball, unless they decide to change the offensive style and go to a more option-oriented attack. I don't see that happening.

Quote:And lastly I just don't see where you get off saying that some people have less vaild points than you, for the simple fact that you don't agree with them.  A lot of posters had a voice in a thread called "Horvath is terrible" started by Huskie Mike, yet you continue to try and pick on one poster.  I hate to say this dan but your opinions are as worthless as all of ours.

My opinion is not "more valid" than anyone else's, they're just mine. What I laugh at is posts like the one you mention and those that suggest that posters know who should be the starting QB based on one half of a spring game's performance from the young QBs. It's not an informed enough opinion, and certainly not nearly as informed as the coaches, and thus IMO is not nearly as valid as.......the people actually making the decision (ie, the coaches).

The idea that "Horvath is terrible" is not true, IMO, and I believe that the coaches would agree with me or he wouldn't have been out there last year. Life and football seasons are too short to play a horrible player because you don't want to blow a redshirt year for 4 starts. Obviously Phil was judged to not be horrible or he wouldn't have kept that starting job for that long. Now, if there were another legit alternative at that time, Phil may not have continued

Anyone that believes that Phil is horrible, do this - watch the tape of the Iowa State game. You're going to be frustrated as hell by a few throws, no doubt about it. But if you don't see good plays and confidence shown in his throwing ability by the coaches, then I truly believe that you are prejudiced against Phil from the get go.

As for this one poster issue, you're nuts if you haven't seen significant venom towards Phil from this poster, while others simply point out Phil's skills or failings.

But your buddy always qualifies his posts about how bad phil is with an example on the field. So i'm not sure his are worse, or if you just focus more on him.

I think what you do is you pick little things out to focus on and blow them up trying to discredit posters as best you can, yet they are doing no worse or better than anyone. I have a hard time saying any one poster has a better opinion than anyone else. If someone wants to say phil sucks...they sure can say it because i can see many examples of why he sucks. But if someone wants to say he doesn't they sure can do that too, because there are many examples of him doing well.

It just really bugs me how someone tries to discredit anyones post on a message board, when in fact we are all equal here. I can say one thing, someone can say opposite, and as it turns out we can both be right or wrong in the same respect.

I really believe that phil horvath sucked last year. I believe he pretty much gave away 24 pts. on turnovers (ISU) and that killed us. But contrary to his preformance last year when he was one of the worst quarterbacks i have ever seen, i really feel that this year he will be a solid quarterback because he knows how poorly he played last year. So i think it's ok to say Horvath sucked...and to feel optimisim in the same breath.

NIUGAMBLER Wrote:But your buddy always qualifies his posts about how bad phil is with an example on the field. So i'm not sure his are worse, or if you just focus more on him.

I think what you do is you pick little things out to focus on and blow them up trying to discredit posters as best you can, yet they are doing no worse or better than anyone. I have a hard time saying any one poster has a better opinion than anyone else. If someone wants to say phil sucks...they sure can say it because i can see many examples of why he sucks. But if someone wants to say he doesn't they sure can do that too, because there are many examples of him doing well.

It just really bugs me how someone tries to discredit anyones post on a message board, when in fact we are all equal here. I can say one thing, someone can say opposite, and as it turns out we can both be right or wrong in the same respect.

I really believe that phil horvath sucked last year. I believe he pretty much gave away 24 pts. on turnovers (ISU) and that killed us. But contrary to his preformance last year when he was one of the worst quarterbacks i have ever seen, i really feel that this year he will be a solid quarterback because he knows how poorly he played last year. So i think it's ok to say Horvath sucked...and to feel optimisim in the same breath.

I'm not trying to discredit anyone, I'm trying to explain how black and white statements like "student athlete A sucks" is not only incorrect but also not in very good taste. It's ironic that you would see it as an attack on one poster, when in fact the posts themselves were attacks on the student athlete.

rocketfootball Wrote:

NIU27 Wrote:

rocketfootball Wrote:

klake87 Wrote:If Horvath is pronounced the starter, I worry about how he is described in some of the postings.  He does not have the best arm(Nicholson) or is the best runner(Davis).  He has been described as the least likely to make a mistake.

A QB like that can go a long way. Especially for a running team like NIU.

Until D's put 8 guys in the box and force him to throw.

If the guy couldn't hit some receivers with 8 guys in the box expecting the run, then he has no business playing QB at any level of college football.

The original poster said he doesn't make mistakes. To me, that means that if a guy is wide open 10 yards down field he can hit him, but he doesn't have a strong arm and doesn't throw the deep ball well.

If I am wrong in my thinking from what the original poster said then, well I guess I have to wonder what the guy is doing playing college football at any level.

Well, Phil certainly knows how to hit someone 10 yards out, most of the time it was the opposing team last year!

HuskieDan Wrote:

NIUGAMBLER Wrote:My only problem with your post is comparing Phil Horvath to Josh Haldi.  They aren't the same guys, with the same team nor the same physical ability.  Phil is probably not as gifted as josh (who ran a 4.6 40!) and phil probably isn't going to have his intangibles.  Does that mean he is going to be bad?  No.  But just based on his preformance on the field...he was bad.  I don't care if it was his first start, or 40th start, he is the starting qb of a D1 school, he has to have some talent.  Now all of that being said about how bad phil was he may play better, but there is a good shot of him being worse.  Does he have sheldon this year?  Big Brad?  So 2 big 'bail out' guys aren't there.

The point of it all is that Phil really is going to earn this starting job based on preformance and just hard work in the off season, not on how he did last year.  More INTs than TDs...and the points off turnovers are pretty high i think its safe to say.  Would britt davis be better qb on this team that isn't going to have 2 safety valves and would maybe need the qb to make a play with his feet on 3rd down?  he sure would be.  But the first 2 downs phil horvath can pilot this team probably as well or better than either nicholson or davis.

This is a valid point. NOBODY KNOWS how the kids are going to play under fire, though we have seen some of what Phil *could* do - he improved over the course of his starting gigs. As to earning the job off of last year - of course the coaches are going to play him because he played last year and only that; of course he's had to earn it.

I only compare him to Josh because they both appear to be managers rather than stud QBs and each struggled in their first few starts yet showed flashes.

A cynic could easily point out that being a 4th year player gives him a hell of a lot more time to know the system and thus he simply looks the least worst due to his competitor's lack of experience. Without being privy to practice observation, I can't say that for sure.

But you also don't blow off the kid because we don't appear to have the same group of WRs - if Powers, Hurd and the rest of the group can't catch that's not Phil's fault (assuming of course that every ball is not 20 feet over the WR's heads). If we had no one out wide, I can see sticking a runner at QB to try for a scramble on certain downs, but I don't think you're going to see much of this strategy. Besides that, I personally think that we have plenty of players that *can* make plays at WR, we just need them to step up. IMO, the coaches will not make the QB decision based on whether the WRs can get open and catch the ball, unless they decide to change the offensive style and go to a more option-oriented attack. I don't see that happening.

Quote:And lastly I just don't see where you get off saying that some people have less vaild points than you, for the simple fact that you don't agree with them.  A lot of posters had a voice in a thread called "Horvath is terrible" started by Huskie Mike, yet you continue to try and pick on one poster.  I hate to say this dan but your opinions are as worthless as all of ours.

My opinion is not "more valid" than anyone else's, they're just mine. What I laugh at is posts like the one you mention and those that suggest that posters know who should be the starting QB based on one half of a spring game's performance from the young QBs. It's not an informed enough opinion, and certainly not nearly as informed as the coaches, and thus IMO is not nearly as valid as.......the people actually making the decision (ie, the coaches).

The idea that "Horvath is terrible" is not true, IMO, and I believe that the coaches would agree with me or he wouldn't have been out there last year. Life and football seasons are too short to play a horrible player because you don't want to blow a redshirt year for 4 starts. Obviously Phil was judged to not be horrible or he wouldn't have kept that starting job for that long. Now, if there were another legit alternative at that time, Phil may not have continued

Anyone that believes that Phil is horrible, do this - watch the tape of the Iowa State game. You're going to be frustrated as hell by a few throws, no doubt about it. But if you don't see good plays and confidence shown in his throwing ability by the coaches, then I truly believe that you are prejudiced against Phil from the get go.

As for this one poster issue, you're nuts if you haven't seen significant venom towards Phil from this poster, while others simply point out Phil's skills or failings.

Dan,

Coaches often DON"T know who is the better player. Brett Favre sat on the bench in Atlanta. Kurt Warner only played because of an injury. Brian Urlacher only started playing middle linebacker because of injuries, Richard Dent was taken with an 8th round pick. Tom Brady was barely looked at by almost all teams. Need I go on?????

There are thousands of examples of coaches sitting on the bast player because they actually DO NOT KNOW! Coaches fall in love with some players for their own reasons and better players often sit behind them.

HuskieDan Wrote:I'm not trying to discredit anyone, I'm trying to explain how black and white statements like "student athlete A sucks" is not only incorrect but also not in very good taste. It's ironic that you would see it as an attack on one poster, when in fact the posts themselves were attacks on the student athlete.

I feel like anyone can say what they want about a student athlete who assumes that risk when they accept free school.

I mean aside from the risk of PLAYING A GAME FOR FREE SCHOOL...

I find it hard for any post anyone makes to be something in "poor taste" if it is generally on topic with some support. Now if it was something that was off topic about something XXX rated then yes, that can be poor taste. But saying a player sucks because like NIU27 put it, he can hit the other team on a 10 yard out, is not wrong or in poor taste.

I personally am shocked that people like you dan talk about the president of a country you live in, by the way if you don't like it you can go, and feel like you can say what you want, but if someone says something about the QUARTERBACK of a college you attended you freak out.

NIU27 Wrote:

HuskieDan Wrote:

NIUGAMBLER Wrote:My only problem with your post is comparing Phil Horvath to Josh Haldi.  They aren't the same guys, with the same team nor the same physical ability.  Phil is probably not as gifted as josh (who ran a 4.6 40!) and phil probably isn't going to have his intangibles.  Does that mean he is going to be bad?  No.  But just based on his preformance on the field...he was bad.  I don't care if it was his first start, or 40th start, he is the starting qb of a D1 school, he has to have some talent.  Now all of that being said about how bad phil was he may play better, but there is a good shot of him being worse.  Does he have sheldon this year?  Big Brad?  So 2 big 'bail out' guys aren't there.

The point of it all is that Phil really is going to earn this starting job based on preformance and just hard work in the off season, not on how he did last year.  More INTs than TDs...and the points off turnovers are pretty high i think its safe to say.  Would britt davis be better qb on this team that isn't going to have 2 safety valves and would maybe need the qb to make a play with his feet on 3rd down?  he sure would be.  But the first 2 downs phil horvath can pilot this team probably as well or better than either nicholson or davis.

This is a valid point. NOBODY KNOWS how the kids are going to play under fire, though we have seen some of what Phil *could* do - he improved over the course of his starting gigs. As to earning the job off of last year - of course the coaches are going to play him because he played last year and only that; of course he's had to earn it.

I only compare him to Josh because they both appear to be managers rather than stud QBs and each struggled in their first few starts yet showed flashes.

A cynic could easily point out that being a 4th year player gives him a hell of a lot more time to know the system and thus he simply looks the least worst due to his competitor's lack of experience. Without being privy to practice observation, I can't say that for sure.

But you also don't blow off the kid because we don't appear to have the same group of WRs - if Powers, Hurd and the rest of the group can't catch that's not Phil's fault (assuming of course that every ball is not 20 feet over the WR's heads). If we had no one out wide, I can see sticking a runner at QB to try for a scramble on certain downs, but I don't think you're going to see much of this strategy. Besides that, I personally think that we have plenty of players that *can* make plays at WR, we just need them to step up. IMO, the coaches will not make the QB decision based on whether the WRs can get open and catch the ball, unless they decide to change the offensive style and go to a more option-oriented attack. I don't see that happening.

Quote:And lastly I just don't see where you get off saying that some people have less vaild points than you, for the simple fact that you don't agree with them.  A lot of posters had a voice in a thread called "Horvath is terrible" started by Huskie Mike, yet you continue to try and pick on one poster.  I hate to say this dan but your opinions are as worthless as all of ours.

My opinion is not "more valid" than anyone else's, they're just mine. What I laugh at is posts like the one you mention and those that suggest that posters know who should be the starting QB based on one half of a spring game's performance from the young QBs. It's not an informed enough opinion, and certainly not nearly as informed as the coaches, and thus IMO is not nearly as valid as.......the people actually making the decision (ie, the coaches).

The idea that "Horvath is terrible" is not true, IMO, and I believe that the coaches would agree with me or he wouldn't have been out there last year. Life and football seasons are too short to play a horrible player because you don't want to blow a redshirt year for 4 starts. Obviously Phil was judged to not be horrible or he wouldn't have kept that starting job for that long. Now, if there were another legit alternative at that time, Phil may not have continued

Anyone that believes that Phil is horrible, do this - watch the tape of the Iowa State game. You're going to be frustrated as hell by a few throws, no doubt about it. But if you don't see good plays and confidence shown in his throwing ability by the coaches, then I truly believe that you are prejudiced against Phil from the get go.

As for this one poster issue, you're nuts if you haven't seen significant venom towards Phil from this poster, while others simply point out Phil's skills or failings.

Dan,

Coaches often DON"T know who is the better player. Brett Favre sat on the bench in Atlanta. Kurt Warner only played because of an injury. Brian Urlacher only started playing middle linebacker because of injuries, Richard Dent was taken with an 8th round pick. Tom Brady was barely looked at by almost all teams. Need I go on?????

There are thousands of examples of coaches sitting on the bast player because they actually DO NOT KNOW! Coaches fall in love with some players for their own reasons and better players often sit behind them.

Right. But who did know about these players? Their mamas?

NIUGAMBLER Wrote:

HuskieDan Wrote:I'm not trying to discredit anyone, I'm trying to explain how black and white statements like "student athlete A sucks" is not only incorrect but also not in very good taste.  It's ironic that you would see it as an attack on one poster, when in fact the posts themselves were attacks on the student athlete.

I feel like anyone can say what they want about a student athlete who assumes that risk when they accept free school.

I mean aside from the risk of PLAYING A GAME FOR FREE SCHOOL...

I find it hard for any post anyone makes to be something in "poor taste" if it is generally on topic with some support. Now if it was something that was off topic about something XXX rated then yes, that can be poor taste. But saying a player sucks because like NIU27 put it, he can hit the other team on a 10 yard out, is not wrong or in poor taste.

I personally am shocked that people like you dan talk about the president of a country you live in, by the way if you don't like it you can go, and feel like you can say what you want, but if someone says something about the QUARTERBACK of a college you attended you freak out.

From the Acceptible Use Policy (AUP):

Quote:Any personal attack on other posters, school administration, and/or student athletes is subject to immediate removal without notice at the discretion of mods and admins.

Now, I can be militant about posts about our student athletes, or you can make it easy on me (and my fellow mods) and employ some taste when posting. f

Rip professionals all you want, but have some more respect for student athletes. Critique them all you want, but I'd hope that you'd have enough class to not just talk about how a kid "sucks" - not to mention, saying "He sucks" really doesn't show much thought on a poster's part, and thus doesn't really do much for your standing as a critic.

Show some class - it's not hard to do, and it makes Huskie fans look better. Or make yourself look like an ****** if you'd like, just don't do it at the expense of a student athlete, because I'll use my discretion.

PS - professionals are fair game, and this includes lawyers (sorry NIU70! :D)

HuskieDan Wrote:

NIUGAMBLER Wrote:

HuskieDan Wrote:I'm not trying to discredit anyone, I'm trying to explain how black and white statements like "student athlete A sucks" is not only incorrect but also not in very good taste.  It's ironic that you would see it as an attack on one poster, when in fact the posts themselves were attacks on the student athlete.

I feel like anyone can say what they want about a student athlete who assumes that risk when they accept free school.

I mean aside from the risk of PLAYING A GAME FOR FREE SCHOOL...

I find it hard for any post anyone makes to be something in "poor taste" if it is generally on topic with some support. Now if it was something that was off topic about something XXX rated then yes, that can be poor taste. But saying a player sucks because like NIU27 put it, he can hit the other team on a 10 yard out, is not wrong or in poor taste.

I personally am shocked that people like you dan talk about the president of a country you live in, by the way if you don't like it you can go, and feel like you can say what you want, but if someone says something about the QUARTERBACK of a college you attended you freak out.

From the Acceptible Use Policy (AUP):

Quote:Any personal attack on other posters, school administration, and/or student athletes is subject to immediate removal without notice at the discretion of mods and admins.

Now, I can be militant about posts about our student athletes, or you can make it easy on me (and my fellow mods) and employ some taste when posting. f

Rip professionals all you want, but have some more respect for student athletes. Critique them all you want, but I'd hope that you'd have enough class to not just talk about how a kid "sucks" - not to mention, saying "He sucks" really doesn't show much thought on a poster's part, and thus doesn't really do much for your standing as a critic.

Show some class - it's not hard to do, and it makes Huskie fans look better. Or make yourself look like an ****** if you'd like, just don't do it at the expense of a student athlete, because I'll use my discretion.

PS - professionals are fair game, and this includes lawyers (sorry NIU70! :D)

The same rules apply to coaches, I have heard enough Judson sucks to last me a lifetime here.

This is true dan. Coaches count, yet judson gets destroyed.

:eek:

HuskieDan Wrote:PS - professionals are fair game, and this includes lawyers (sorry NIU70! :D)

Hey,H-DAN watch that. Not unlike people close to you, I am a public servant. BTW, why rag on me???? But I can agree with you about a lot of lawyers.

HuskieDan Wrote:

NIU27 Wrote:

HuskieDan Wrote:

NIUGAMBLER Wrote:My only problem with your post is comparing Phil Horvath to Josh Haldi.  They aren't the same guys, with the same team nor the same physical ability.  Phil is probably not as gifted as josh (who ran a 4.6 40!) and phil probably isn't going to have his intangibles.  Does that mean he is going to be bad?  No.  But just based on his preformance on the field...he was bad.  I don't care if it was his first start, or 40th start, he is the starting qb of a D1 school, he has to have some talent.  Now all of that being said about how bad phil was he may play better, but there is a good shot of him being worse.  Does he have sheldon this year?  Big Brad?  So 2 big 'bail out' guys aren't there.

The point of it all is that Phil really is going to earn this starting job based on preformance and just hard work in the off season, not on how he did last year.  More INTs than TDs...and the points off turnovers are pretty high i think its safe to say.  Would britt davis be better qb on this team that isn't going to have 2 safety valves and would maybe need the qb to make a play with his feet on 3rd down?  he sure would be.  But the first 2 downs phil horvath can pilot this team probably as well or better than either nicholson or davis.

This is a valid point. NOBODY KNOWS how the kids are going to play under fire, though we have seen some of what Phil *could* do - he improved over the course of his starting gigs. As to earning the job off of last year - of course the coaches are going to play him because he played last year and only that; of course he's had to earn it.

I only compare him to Josh because they both appear to be managers rather than stud QBs and each struggled in their first few starts yet showed flashes.

A cynic could easily point out that being a 4th year player gives him a hell of a lot more time to know the system and thus he simply looks the least worst due to his competitor's lack of experience. Without being privy to practice observation, I can't say that for sure.

But you also don't blow off the kid because we don't appear to have the same group of WRs - if Powers, Hurd and the rest of the group can't catch that's not Phil's fault (assuming of course that every ball is not 20 feet over the WR's heads). If we had no one out wide, I can see sticking a runner at QB to try for a scramble on certain downs, but I don't think you're going to see much of this strategy. Besides that, I personally think that we have plenty of players that *can* make plays at WR, we just need them to step up. IMO, the coaches will not make the QB decision based on whether the WRs can get open and catch the ball, unless they decide to change the offensive style and go to a more option-oriented attack. I don't see that happening.

Quote:And lastly I just don't see where you get off saying that some people have less vaild points than you, for the simple fact that you don't agree with them.  A lot of posters had a voice in a thread called "Horvath is terrible" started by Huskie Mike, yet you continue to try and pick on one poster.  I hate to say this dan but your opinions are as worthless as all of ours.

My opinion is not "more valid" than anyone else's, they're just mine. What I laugh at is posts like the one you mention and those that suggest that posters know who should be the starting QB based on one half of a spring game's performance from the young QBs. It's not an informed enough opinion, and certainly not nearly as informed as the coaches, and thus IMO is not nearly as valid as.......the people actually making the decision (ie, the coaches).

The idea that "Horvath is terrible" is not true, IMO, and I believe that the coaches would agree with me or he wouldn't have been out there last year. Life and football seasons are too short to play a horrible player because you don't want to blow a redshirt year for 4 starts. Obviously Phil was judged to not be horrible or he wouldn't have kept that starting job for that long. Now, if there were another legit alternative at that time, Phil may not have continued

Anyone that believes that Phil is horrible, do this - watch the tape of the Iowa State game. You're going to be frustrated as hell by a few throws, no doubt about it. But if you don't see good plays and confidence shown in his throwing ability by the coaches, then I truly believe that you are prejudiced against Phil from the get go.

As for this one poster issue, you're nuts if you haven't seen significant venom towards Phil from this poster, while others simply point out Phil's skills or failings.

Dan,

Coaches often DON"T know who is the better player. Brett Favre sat on the bench in Atlanta. Kurt Warner only played because of an injury. Brian Urlacher only started playing middle linebacker because of injuries, Richard Dent was taken with an 8th round pick. Tom Brady was barely looked at by almost all teams. Need I go on?????

There are thousands of examples of coaches sitting on the bast player because they actually DO NOT KNOW! Coaches fall in love with some players for their own reasons and better players often sit behind them.

Right. But who did know about these players? Their mamas?

Dan, you are telling me that there wasn't one person - a fan, former teammate, former coach, former scout, etc. who didn't say "You guys are making a mistake this guy is going to be great"

Please, as I have said before, coaches as a group are some of the most narrow-minded people once they get their mind set on something or someone, and some are just plain dumb.

Let me give you an example:

If there is a runner on first with 0 outs they are likely to score from first 46% of the time. If a runner is on second with 1 out they score 42% of the time. What do all these "smart" coaches do in close games? - they bunt them over. The only time a bunt should be used is if a terrible player or pitcher is up. These are facts from Stats Inc. Baseball's #1 analytical tool.

Coaches are so stubborn they would rather make dumb decisions.

NIUGAMBLER Wrote:This is true dan. Coaches count, yet judson gets destroyed.

:eek:

Quote:at the discretion of mods and admins.

Which part of this don't you understand?

I consider coaches to be professionals, considering they're paid for their jobs. Student athletes are different, and that is where my discretion lies. (it should be noted, that mods and admins I have corresponded with tend to back me on this)