Chaddyboxer Posted November 2, 2011 Share Posted November 2, 2011 I use prior evidence...like players being put in the "dog house" for ill behavior. There is a possibility that JT is in the "doghouse." Quote Link to comment
Chaddyboxer Posted November 2, 2011 Share Posted November 2, 2011 The coaches do and have FLAT OUT LIED! lol. sheesh. No big deal man. I don't want to get into an argument about this. Please lol. No big deal man. It's my assumption and observation. I am not attacking the coaches in anyway and I have stated my position on how I feel about them. As you can see, I respect all the coaches and I am glad that we have the staff that we do currently have, I am just not completely convinced that they tell the public the truth all the time. If I was a coach and felt like certain issues didn't need to be truthfully disclosed to the public...I would lie a bit to protect my team, the program and my players. Simple as that. Quote Link to comment
Chaddyboxer Posted November 2, 2011 Share Posted November 2, 2011 And I honestly don't find anything wrong with that. I hope to see JT out there playing soon though. The kid IS AND HAS TALENT. I do not want to see it wasted. Quote Link to comment
Moiraine Posted November 2, 2011 Share Posted November 2, 2011 And I honestly don't find anything wrong with that. I hope to see JT out there playing soon though. The kid IS AND HAS TALENT. I do not want to see it wasted. Are you aware that there's an edit button on posts? You don't have to make four replies in a row. Quote Link to comment
The Dude Posted November 2, 2011 Share Posted November 2, 2011 If we have seen one flaw with this coaching staff it's that they want to play the top 22 and nobody else. You have got to be kidding, right??? I meant the top 11 on O and the top 11 on D, with very few substitutions. Nice post! I like the comedy bit where you suggested the coaching staff plays the top 11 on O and the top 11 on D, with very few substitutions. Hilarious! Quote Link to comment
jsneb83 Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 And I honestly don't find anything wrong with that. I hope to see JT out there playing soon though. The kid IS AND HAS TALENT. I do not want to see it wasted. Are you aware that there's an edit button on posts? You don't have to make four replies in a row. He wants to rack up his post count. Quote Link to comment
Chaddyboxer Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 And I honestly don't find anything wrong with that. I hope to see JT out there playing soon though. The kid IS AND HAS TALENT. I do not want to see it wasted. Are you aware that there's an edit button on posts? You don't have to make four replies in a row. thank you. note to self Quote Link to comment
Chaddyboxer Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 And I honestly don't find anything wrong with that. I hope to see JT out there playing soon though. The kid IS AND HAS TALENT. I do not want to see it wasted. Are you aware that there's an edit button on posts? You don't have to make four replies in a row. He wants to rack up his post count. this guys got it! the more posts, the more cooler i am!! WHOO HOO!!! Quote Link to comment
sd'sker Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 And I honestly don't find anything wrong with that. I hope to see JT out there playing soon though. The kid IS AND HAS TALENT. I do not want to see it wasted. Are you aware that there's an edit button on posts? You don't have to make four replies in a row. He wants to rack up his post count. this guys got it! the more posts, the more cooler i am!! WHOO HOO!!! there is also 'multiquote', but i'm not one to micromanage. Quote Link to comment
Chaddyboxer Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 And I honestly don't find anything wrong with that. I hope to see JT out there playing soon though. The kid IS AND HAS TALENT. I do not want to see it wasted. Are you aware that there's an edit button on posts? You don't have to make four replies in a row. He wants to rack up his post count. this guys got it! the more posts, the more cooler i am!! WHOO HOO!!! there is also 'multiquote', but i'm not one to micromanage. I didn't know this. My bad. Thanks for letting me know though! ; P Quote Link to comment
sd'sker Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 And I honestly don't find anything wrong with that. I hope to see JT out there playing soon though. The kid IS AND HAS TALENT. I do not want to see it wasted. Are you aware that there's an edit button on posts? You don't have to make four replies in a row. He wants to rack up his post count. this guys got it! the more posts, the more cooler i am!! WHOO HOO!!! there is also 'multiquote', but i'm not one to micromanage. I didn't know this. My bad. Thanks for letting me know though! ; P obviously, it is no big deal. it took me awhile to figure it as well. much easier with the new format. Quote Link to comment
AustinHuskr Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 The whole premise of this thread is just dumb. As a coach, I hate when people without first-hand knowledge substitute their uninformed opinion for the choices the coaches make. Look, the coaches are there at practice with these guys every day. They are in meetings with these guys every day. Second guessing a coach's decision on playing time is just mental masturbation. Why not just title the thread "My son should be the starting quarterback"? I get emails from parents questioning my coaching decisions all the time... "Why isn't my son playing more? He was on a select team in junior high!" It might be that I see your son in practice every day, and he just hasn't impressed me with his skills enough to take playing time away from other guys who are performing better. As for Jammal "definitely scoring" on the play --- not so fast my friend. The Spartans might have reacted differently if Jammal had lined up wide and gone in motion. He might have been tackled for a loss, because the Spartan defense would be expecting Jammal to get the reverse. Marlowe in motion didn't raise a danger flag in the defense's mind, and that might have been the key factor in the play working. Would Jamal have scored if he had done the end-around? Hard to say. I don't believe Turner is that much faster than Marlowe, who is an under-appreciated burner. Jamal looks like a more fluid runner out there, but the DB had the angle on Marlowe and that's why he got caught (same thing happened to BK against the Gophers). Turner may have given the DB some shake-n-bake and scored, but Marlowe did his job getting it down to the 1 yard line. From there the rest of the team should have been able to punch it in. That's on the playcalling and execution, not Marlowe. Regardless, the "leading WR" on the team needs to be a lot more involved than just making cursory appearances. Quote Link to comment
redblooded Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 sometimes people have to be snapped back into reality, especially freshmen. There seems to be a pretty strong you play how you practice sentiment from the coaches aka don't half ass it if you want to play. If that was the case, it's by far the better long term decision to send a message now. Quote Link to comment
Hercules Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 The whole premise of this thread is just dumb. As a coach, I hate when people without first-hand knowledge substitute their uninformed opinion for the choices the coaches make. Look, the coaches are there at practice with these guys every day. They are in meetings with these guys every day. Second guessing a coach's decision on playing time is just mental masturbation. Why not just title the thread "My son should be the starting quarterback"? I get emails from parents questioning my coaching decisions all the time... "Why isn't my son playing more? He was on a select team in junior high!" It might be that I see your son in practice every day, and he just hasn't impressed me with his skills enough to take playing time away from other guys who are performing better. As for Jammal "definitely scoring" on the play --- not so fast my friend. The Spartans might have reacted differently if Jammal had lined up wide and gone in motion. He might have been tackled for a loss, because the Spartan defense would be expecting Jammal to get the reverse. Marlowe in motion didn't raise a danger flag in the defense's mind, and that might have been the key factor in the play working. Would Jamal have scored if he had done the end-around? Hard to say. I don't believe Turner is that much faster than Marlowe, who is an under-appreciated burner. Jamal looks like a more fluid runner out there, but the DB had the angle on Marlowe and that's why he got caught (same thing happened to BK against the Gophers). Turner may have given the DB some shake-n-bake and scored, but Marlowe did his job getting it down to the 1 yard line. From there the rest of the team should have been able to punch it in. That's on the playcalling and execution, not Marlowe. Regardless, the "leading WR" on the team needs to be a lot more involved than just making cursory appearances. Not if he's going to drop the ball like he did on that sure touchdown pass against Minnesota. That kind of play could be the difference between a win and a loss against a better team. Quote Link to comment
HUSKER 37 Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 Coach Fisher and Coach Beck laid out in very black and white terms why Jamal isn't seeing the field much. What's with the extra speculation? yeah i thought that had something to do with it, about how in practice he did not remember all his assignments, and wasn't consistently lining up properly. amirite? Quote Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.