Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.

With All That Being Said....

2»

Comments

  • FireCohen
    FireCohen Member Posts: 21,823
    How are sample and dissly all of sudden try hards? Wtf happened
  • TurdBomber
    TurdBomber Member Posts: 20,035 Standard Supporter
    edited May 2019

    Doogles said:

    Too many here keep trying to label him a "classic Pete try hard", solely because he's short and white. He's quite the opposite though. He's a gun slinger with decent mobility, subpar accuracy, and absolutely horrible decision making.

    BBK was the only successful white ACTUAL try hard we’ve really had. Everyone else has either been a fraud (Brownsocks) or a fuckbag without talent (Haener).

    I want to die.
    Off top Nick Harris, Dissly, Myles Bryant, Ezekiel Turner, Littleton and Sample are successful try hards
    Dissly is not a try hard in any sense. He had big time physical characteristics. Sample either.

    Too wrapped up in stars. Try hards are guys who have to try harder because they don’t have the physical characteristics.

    Bryant and Harris, sure. Littleton is just a normal dude. Same with Turner.

    Look at Sample’s combine numbers - no fucking way is he a try hard. Nothing to overcome.

    Bryant and Harris are hard nuts to crack, but I would give it to them.

    If you have a team full of Dexter Lawrences and Trevor Lawrences, you can have a guy like Renfrow who makes a lot of plays with quickness and smarts (he and Bryant are really similar). However, they can only be successful when they are a change of pace or strategy.

    BBK still got washed against tOSU, but he’s truly big time in backside pursuit.

    And I’m a guy who can appreciate when a man is great in backside pursuit.
    Just because you're a big dude doesn't mean you can't be a try-hard. I doubt anyone expected Gaines, Sample, and Dissly to be be NFL draft picks based on their high school physical characteristics. Just like BBK, they tried hard and got there. It's weird that you're whittling down the try-hard definition to small white guy so that it only includes BBK.
    What is the common thread about the guys you mentioned... I'm trying to sense it... trying... hmmm... what could it be?

    Too many here keep trying to label him a "classic Pete try hard", solely because he's short and white. He's quite the opposite though. He's a gun slinger with decent mobility, subpar accuracy, and absolutely horrible decision making.

    BBK was the only successful white ACTUAL try hard we’ve really had. Everyone else has either been a fraud (Brownsocks) or a fuckbag without talent (Haener).

    I want to die.
    I was listing some other successful white ACTUAL try-hards that we've had. Understand now?
    Gaines wasn’t a try hard. He was making plays as a RS Freshman because he was talented as fuck. He was drafted in the 4th round of the NFL because he is talented as fuck. Just because he is white and an inch too short doesn’t mean he is a try hard. He’s oozing talent.

    Sample and Dissly have ideal TE size, soft hands, and have perfect blocking technique so they own defenders. They were drafted in the 2nd and 4th round because they are talented as fuck. Just because they are white doesn’t mean they are try hards. They are oozing talent.

    Try hards are trying hard because they lack talent or measurables. You didn’t list any ACTUAL try hards.
    I fail to understand how BBK is any different than those guys. They all weren't big time talents coming out of high school with big time offers. They all got developed. BBK also ended up with some excellent measurables. They're all either try-hards or they're all not.
    BBK fought containment and tackling deficiencies for his whole career because of his size and speed. He didn't start breaking down, containing and turning guys inside very well until his senior year. As a FR & SO, he overran plays constantly or had guys break his tackles too easily because his momentum sent him past a runner or receiver as soon as they hit the breaks or made a cut.

    It was great to watch his improvement and tune his abilities to be as effective as he possibly could, as he began to prioritize "getting there" at the right angle, grabbing on and waiting for the help or riding on a runner's back for 5 or 6 yards as they fell forward, because if he didn't initiate the tackles half the time, there was nobody else nearby who could either, given our lack of depth in our injury-prone LB corps.

    Gaines was bad-ass right from the start, and so was Dissly - both due to raw talent, size and speed/strength - 3 departments BBK was light in, but overcame to be an effective player in a badly needed area of the defense.

    I look at it this way: Steve Largent was a try-hard, too. Sometimes they break through and become miraculous, but it's about 1 in 100 that do, versus the guys born with the gifts. And those "born with it" guys are who UW needs a lot more of.

    And with all that being said, Jake Haener still sucks.
  • CallMeBigErn
    CallMeBigErn Member Posts: 8,028
    FirePete said:

    How are sample and dissly all of sudden try hards? Wtf happened

    My boy BBK got called a try hard. That's not something that slides.
  • TurdBomber
    TurdBomber Member Posts: 20,035 Standard Supporter
    edited May 2019

    FirePete said:

    How are sample and dissly all of sudden try hards? Wtf happened

    My boy BBK got called a try hard. That's not something that slides.
    It's not as bad as it seems after the fact. The problem is up front, during recruiting. You gotta limit your try-hard types or they'll define your program, win the little games but lose the big ones, and ultimately relegate you to a top 20 program, not a top 5.

    But what really matters is where you stand on Haener?
  • Alexis
    Alexis Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 3,386 Founders Club

    Doogles said:

    Too many here keep trying to label him a "classic Pete try hard", solely because he's short and white. He's quite the opposite though. He's a gun slinger with decent mobility, subpar accuracy, and absolutely horrible decision making.

    BBK was the only successful white ACTUAL try hard we’ve really had. Everyone else has either been a fraud (Brownsocks) or a fuckbag without talent (Haener).

    I want to die.
    Off top Nick Harris, Dissly, Myles Bryant, Ezekiel Turner, Littleton and Sample are successful try hards
    Dissly is not a try hard in any sense. He had big time physical characteristics. Sample either.

    Too wrapped up in stars. Try hards are guys who have to try harder because they don’t have the physical characteristics.

    Bryant and Harris, sure. Littleton is just a normal dude. Same with Turner.

    Look at Sample’s combine numbers - no fucking way is he a try hard. Nothing to overcome.

    Bryant and Harris are hard nuts to crack, but I would give it to them.

    If you have a team full of Dexter Lawrences and Trevor Lawrences, you can have a guy like Renfrow who makes a lot of plays with quickness and smarts (he and Bryant are really similar). However, they can only be successful when they are a change of pace or strategy.

    BBK still got washed against tOSU, but he’s truly big time in backside pursuit.

    And I’m a guy who can appreciate when a man is great in backside pursuit.
    Just because you're a big dude doesn't mean you can't be a try-hard. I doubt anyone expected Gaines, Sample, and Dissly to be be NFL draft picks based on their high school physical characteristics. Just like BBK, they tried hard and got there. It's weird that you're whittling down the try-hard definition to small white guy so that it only includes BBK.
    What is the common thread about the guys you mentioned... I'm trying to sense it... trying... hmmm... what could it be?

    Too many here keep trying to label him a "classic Pete try hard", solely because he's short and white. He's quite the opposite though. He's a gun slinger with decent mobility, subpar accuracy, and absolutely horrible decision making.

    BBK was the only successful white ACTUAL try hard we’ve really had. Everyone else has either been a fraud (Brownsocks) or a fuckbag without talent (Haener).

    I want to die.
    I was listing some other successful white ACTUAL try-hards that we've had. Understand now?
    Gaines wasn’t a try hard. He was making plays as a RS Freshman because he was talented as fuck. He was drafted in the 4th round of the NFL because he is talented as fuck. Just because he is white and an inch too short doesn’t mean he is a try hard. He’s oozing talent.

    Sample and Dissly have ideal TE size, soft hands, and have perfect blocking technique so they own defenders. They were drafted in the 2nd and 4th round because they are talented as fuck. Just because they are white doesn’t mean they are try hards. They are oozing talent.

    Try hards are trying hard because they lack talent or measurables. You didn’t list any ACTUAL try hards.
    I fail to understand how BBK is any different than those guys. They all weren't big time talents coming out of high school with big time offers. They all got developed. BBK also ended up with some excellent measurables. They're all either try-hards or they're all not.
    BBK fought containment and tackling deficiencies for his whole career because of his size and speed. He didn't start breaking down, containing and turning guys inside very well until his senior year. As a FR & SO, he overran plays constantly or had guys break his tackles too easily because his momentum sent him past a runner or receiver as soon as they hit the breaks or made a cut.

    It was great to watch his improvement and tune his abilities to be as effective as he possibly could, as he began to prioritize "getting there" at the right angle, grabbing on and waiting for the help or riding on a runner's back for 5 or 6 yards as they fell forward, because if he didn't initiate the tackles half the time, there was nobody else nearby who could either, given our lack of depth in our injury-prone LB corps.

    Gaines was bad-ass right from the start, and so was Dissly - both due to raw talent, size and speed/strength - 3 departments BBK was light in, but overcame to be an effective player in a badly needed area of the defense.

    I look at it this way: Steve Largent was a try-hard, too. Sometimes they break through and become miraculous, but it's about 1 in 100 that do, versus the guys born with the gifts. And those "born with it" guys are who UW needs a lot more of.

    And with all that being said, Jake Haener still sucks.

    Was Jerry Rice a try hard? He was pretty slow for a fast strategy receiver. Axing for a fren.
  • TurdBomber
    TurdBomber Member Posts: 20,035 Standard Supporter
    Alexis said:

    Doogles said:

    Too many here keep trying to label him a "classic Pete try hard", solely because he's short and white. He's quite the opposite though. He's a gun slinger with decent mobility, subpar accuracy, and absolutely horrible decision making.

    BBK was the only successful white ACTUAL try hard we’ve really had. Everyone else has either been a fraud (Brownsocks) or a fuckbag without talent (Haener).

    I want to die.
    Off top Nick Harris, Dissly, Myles Bryant, Ezekiel Turner, Littleton and Sample are successful try hards
    Dissly is not a try hard in any sense. He had big time physical characteristics. Sample either.

    Too wrapped up in stars. Try hards are guys who have to try harder because they don’t have the physical characteristics.

    Bryant and Harris, sure. Littleton is just a normal dude. Same with Turner.

    Look at Sample’s combine numbers - no fucking way is he a try hard. Nothing to overcome.

    Bryant and Harris are hard nuts to crack, but I would give it to them.

    If you have a team full of Dexter Lawrences and Trevor Lawrences, you can have a guy like Renfrow who makes a lot of plays with quickness and smarts (he and Bryant are really similar). However, they can only be successful when they are a change of pace or strategy.

    BBK still got washed against tOSU, but he’s truly big time in backside pursuit.

    And I’m a guy who can appreciate when a man is great in backside pursuit.
    Just because you're a big dude doesn't mean you can't be a try-hard. I doubt anyone expected Gaines, Sample, and Dissly to be be NFL draft picks based on their high school physical characteristics. Just like BBK, they tried hard and got there. It's weird that you're whittling down the try-hard definition to small white guy so that it only includes BBK.
    What is the common thread about the guys you mentioned... I'm trying to sense it... trying... hmmm... what could it be?

    Too many here keep trying to label him a "classic Pete try hard", solely because he's short and white. He's quite the opposite though. He's a gun slinger with decent mobility, subpar accuracy, and absolutely horrible decision making.

    BBK was the only successful white ACTUAL try hard we’ve really had. Everyone else has either been a fraud (Brownsocks) or a fuckbag without talent (Haener).

    I want to die.
    I was listing some other successful white ACTUAL try-hards that we've had. Understand now?
    Gaines wasn’t a try hard. He was making plays as a RS Freshman because he was talented as fuck. He was drafted in the 4th round of the NFL because he is talented as fuck. Just because he is white and an inch too short doesn’t mean he is a try hard. He’s oozing talent.

    Sample and Dissly have ideal TE size, soft hands, and have perfect blocking technique so they own defenders. They were drafted in the 2nd and 4th round because they are talented as fuck. Just because they are white doesn’t mean they are try hards. They are oozing talent.

    Try hards are trying hard because they lack talent or measurables. You didn’t list any ACTUAL try hards.
    I fail to understand how BBK is any different than those guys. They all weren't big time talents coming out of high school with big time offers. They all got developed. BBK also ended up with some excellent measurables. They're all either try-hards or they're all not.
    BBK fought containment and tackling deficiencies for his whole career because of his size and speed. He didn't start breaking down, containing and turning guys inside very well until his senior year. As a FR & SO, he overran plays constantly or had guys break his tackles too easily because his momentum sent him past a runner or receiver as soon as they hit the breaks or made a cut.

    It was great to watch his improvement and tune his abilities to be as effective as he possibly could, as he began to prioritize "getting there" at the right angle, grabbing on and waiting for the help or riding on a runner's back for 5 or 6 yards as they fell forward, because if he didn't initiate the tackles half the time, there was nobody else nearby who could either, given our lack of depth in our injury-prone LB corps.

    Gaines was bad-ass right from the start, and so was Dissly - both due to raw talent, size and speed/strength - 3 departments BBK was light in, but overcame to be an effective player in a badly needed area of the defense.

    I look at it this way: Steve Largent was a try-hard, too. Sometimes they break through and become miraculous, but it's about 1 in 100 that do, versus the guys born with the gifts. And those "born with it" guys are who UW needs a lot more of.

    And with all that being said, Jake Haener still sucks.

    Was Jerry Rice a try hard? He was pretty slow for a fast strategy receiver. Axing for a fren.
    Great route runner and great hands & length (YKW) on a team full of MVP QB's who put the ball on a dime for him, over and over. His speed looked pretty goddamn good on his college tapes from Mississippi Valley State.
  • CallMeBigErn
    CallMeBigErn Member Posts: 8,028
    edited May 2019

    FirePete said:

    How are sample and dissly all of sudden try hards? Wtf happened

    My boy BBK got called a try hard. That's not something that slides.
    It's not as bad as it seems after the fact. The problem is up front, during recruiting. You gotta limit your try-hard types or they'll define your program, win the little games but lose the big ones, and ultimately relegate you to a top 20 program, not a top 5.

    But what really matters is where you stand on Haener?
    I don't know how good Haener is because I have seen him play a little against North Dakota and one series against Cal. That being said, I hope Haener only plays in mop-up duty because I'd rather have two years of Eason and four of Huard.
  • TurdBomber
    TurdBomber Member Posts: 20,035 Standard Supporter
    edited May 2019

    FirePete said:

    How are sample and dissly all of sudden try hards? Wtf happened

    My boy BBK got called a try hard. That's not something that slides.
    It's not as bad as it seems after the fact. The problem is up front, during recruiting. You gotta limit your try-hard types or they'll define your program, win the little games but lose the big ones, and ultimately relegate you to a top 20 program, not a top 5.

    But what really matters is where you stand on Haener?
    I don't know how good Haener is because I have seen him play a little against North Dakota and one series against Cal. That being said, I hope Haener only plays in mop-up duty because I'd rather have two years of Eason and four of Huard.
    C+ Arm. C- Head.

    Our visual standards have fallen dramatically after 4 years of extreme mediocrity at QB.
  • CallMeBigErn
    CallMeBigErn Member Posts: 8,028
    edited May 2019

    FirePete said:

    How are sample and dissly all of sudden try hards? Wtf happened

    My boy BBK got called a try hard. That's not something that slides.
    It's not as bad as it seems after the fact. The problem is up front, during recruiting. You gotta limit your try-hard types or they'll define your program, win the little games but lose the big ones, and ultimately relegate you to a top 20 program, not a top 5.

    But what really matters is where you stand on Haener?
    I don't know how good Haener is because I have seen him play a little against North Dakota and one series against Cal. That being said, I hope Haener only plays in mop-up duty because I'd rather have two years of Eason and four of Huard.
    C+ Arm. C- Head.

    Our visual standards have fallen dramatically after 4 years of extreme mediocrity at QB.
    One half of duty as a freshman is not enough for me to make a judgement call on Haener. I've maintained that. He looked great against North Dakota and then had a bad series against Cal. That's it.
  • TurdBomber
    TurdBomber Member Posts: 20,035 Standard Supporter

    FirePete said:

    How are sample and dissly all of sudden try hards? Wtf happened

    My boy BBK got called a try hard. That's not something that slides.
    It's not as bad as it seems after the fact. The problem is up front, during recruiting. You gotta limit your try-hard types or they'll define your program, win the little games but lose the big ones, and ultimately relegate you to a top 20 program, not a top 5.

    But what really matters is where you stand on Haener?
    I don't know how good Haener is because I have seen him play a little against North Dakota and one series against Cal. That being said, I hope Haener only plays in mop-up duty because I'd rather have two years of Eason and four of Huard.
    C+ Arm. C- Head.

    Our visual standards have fallen dramatically after 4 years of extreme mediocrity at QB.
    One half of duty as a freshman is not enough for me to make a judgement call on Haener. I've maintained that. He looked great against North Dakota and then had a bad series against Cal. That's it.
    Did you watch the Spring fling? Very, very telling after another year and hundreds of snaps.
  • animate
    animate Member Posts: 4,245

    Doogles said:

    Too many here keep trying to label him a "classic Pete try hard", solely because he's short and white. He's quite the opposite though. He's a gun slinger with decent mobility, subpar accuracy, and absolutely horrible decision making.

    BBK was the only successful white ACTUAL try hard we’ve really had. Everyone else has either been a fraud (Brownsocks) or a fuckbag without talent (Haener).

    I want to die.
    Off top Nick Harris, Dissly, Myles Bryant, Ezekiel Turner, Littleton and Sample are successful try hards
    Dissly is not a try hard in any sense. He had big time physical characteristics. Sample either.

    Too wrapped up in stars. Try hards are guys who have to try harder because they don’t have the physical characteristics.

    Bryant and Harris, sure. Littleton is just a normal dude. Same with Turner.

    Look at Sample’s combine numbers - no fucking way is he a try hard. Nothing to overcome.

    Bryant and Harris are hard nuts to crack, but I would give it to them.

    If you have a team full of Dexter Lawrences and Trevor Lawrences, you can have a guy like Renfrow who makes a lot of plays with quickness and smarts (he and Bryant are really similar). However, they can only be successful when they are a change of pace or strategy.

    BBK still got washed against tOSU, but he’s truly big time in backside pursuit.

    And I’m a guy who can appreciate when a man is great in backside pursuit.
    Just because you're a big dude doesn't mean you can't be a try-hard. I doubt anyone expected Gaines, Sample, and Dissly to be be NFL draft picks based on their high school physical characteristics. Just like BBK, they tried hard and got there. It's weird that you're whittling down the try-hard definition to small white guy so that it only includes BBK.
    What is the common thread about the guys you mentioned... I'm trying to sense it... trying... hmmm... what could it be?
    All these guys in this thready trying to define "try hard" ... are white dudes.

    Except for Dennis.
  • CallMeBigErn
    CallMeBigErn Member Posts: 8,028
    edited May 2019

    FirePete said:

    How are sample and dissly all of sudden try hards? Wtf happened

    My boy BBK got called a try hard. That's not something that slides.
    It's not as bad as it seems after the fact. The problem is up front, during recruiting. You gotta limit your try-hard types or they'll define your program, win the little games but lose the big ones, and ultimately relegate you to a top 20 program, not a top 5.

    But what really matters is where you stand on Haener?
    I don't know how good Haener is because I have seen him play a little against North Dakota and one series against Cal. That being said, I hope Haener only plays in mop-up duty because I'd rather have two years of Eason and four of Huard.
    C+ Arm. C- Head.

    Our visual standards have fallen dramatically after 4 years of extreme mediocrity at QB.
    One half of duty as a freshman is not enough for me to make a judgement call on Haener. I've maintained that. He looked great against North Dakota and then had a bad series against Cal. That's it.
    Did you watch the Spring fling? Very, very telling after another year and hundreds of snaps.
    It's a shitty fuckin' practice, mate. I'm not defending Haener but I'm not attacking him either because I just don't fuckin' know. I'd prefer if he ends up a good backup QB.
  • CallMeBigErn
    CallMeBigErn Member Posts: 8,028
    Doogles said:

    From what I gather a try hard is someone who out performs their recruiting ranking because apparently the only real way to measure the talent of a team is by it's 4/5 star player ratio.

    From that perspective, anyone who out works or you know tries hard to improve their abilities is labeled as such.

    Dissly 2 star
    Gaines low 3star Boise commit
    BBK low 3 star
    Drew Sample low 3 star

    I want every 5 star on the block too, but trying to paint a try hard as a bad thing is bullshit.


  • TurdBomber
    TurdBomber Member Posts: 20,035 Standard Supporter

    FirePete said:

    How are sample and dissly all of sudden try hards? Wtf happened

    My boy BBK got called a try hard. That's not something that slides.
    It's not as bad as it seems after the fact. The problem is up front, during recruiting. You gotta limit your try-hard types or they'll define your program, win the little games but lose the big ones, and ultimately relegate you to a top 20 program, not a top 5.

    But what really matters is where you stand on Haener?
    I don't know how good Haener is because I have seen him play a little against North Dakota and one series against Cal. That being said, I hope Haener only plays in mop-up duty because I'd rather have two years of Eason and four of Huard.
    C+ Arm. C- Head.

    Our visual standards have fallen dramatically after 4 years of extreme mediocrity at QB.
    One half of duty as a freshman is not enough for me to make a judgement call on Haener. I've maintained that. He looked great against North Dakota and then had a bad series against Cal. That's it.
    He bounced a pass off of the fucking turf.
    Yeah, but it wasn't on purpose, so...
  • jecornel
    jecornel Member Posts: 9,737
    #myHaener, game one starter. Eason starts game 2 finishes out the year undefeated. Next Stop Oakland.
  • TurdBomber
    TurdBomber Member Posts: 20,035 Standard Supporter
    edited May 2019
    jecornel said:

    #myHaener, game one starter. Eason starts game 2 finishes out the year undefeated. Next Stop Oakland.

    That hashtag must die.
  • jecornel
    jecornel Member Posts: 9,737

    jecornel said:

    #myHaener, game one starter. Eason starts game 2 finishes out the year undefeated. Next Stop Oakland.

    That hashtag must die.
    after game one it will no longer exist.