Woof
Comments
-
So, what you're saying is—at this rate—2641 will be special?ThomasFremont said:
Around here we call that incremental progress.Dennis_DeYoung said:
Except for the fact we're wasting scholarships.ThomasFremont said:
If you replaced Wisconsin, Iowa and BC with Utah St, San Diego St, and Fresno St you'd have a poont.Dennis_DeYoung said:
This was basically the standard poast during the Willingham years.bananasnblondes said:
What specifically do you hate about this player, or Quinten Pounds for that matter? You seem to be on this kick of whining about how much we suck and how much our recruited players suck but you don't offer any reasons why you don't like their play. The fact is, we're UW. We've sucked for over a decade now. It's not like Petersen has his pick of 6'4'' 4 and 5-star wide receivers who just have to be asked to come here. We're gonna have to take some B-level players, so why does this kid specifically suck compared to other B-level slot receivers? You already tried the speed thing and got your ass handed to you by another poster, so try something else.Dennis_DeYoung said:
Yeah, the issue in my opinion is that you NEVER take B-receivers like this. McClatcher? Fine. That dude has serious quickness. You can see a way forward. Renfro looks really good—Michael Crabtree type kid.HeretoBeatmyChest said:The guy might turn out to be good. Problem is he likely has no chance to be a #1 gamebreaker WR which is what we really need. Maybe we will get lucky and a few young WR's will be good. It just means we aren't doing so well with the higher rated guys.
Considering this class and past few years, Pete's UW could be UW in the early Lambo era....good defense, excellent lines, short on WR talent and gamebreakers on offense. String = Jason Shelly?
But Q-Pounds and all that crap? Why? You can move any idiot to WR and have a mediocre WR, you don't need to recruit them.
Here's what we know about the kid:
He scores a ton of TDs
He catches a ton of balls
He plays in a legit league
Wisconsin, Iowa, and BC wanted him. He visited Oklahoma, TCU, and Ok State recently
He's not amazing, but if you're gonna shit on him, at least back it up with something other than him not being as good as some of the elite receivers in teh west we can't get
It's a fucking WR...aka the LEAST important position on offense.
Until we have an offensive scheme, a QB, and an OL, it doesn't fucking matter.
You make a good poont re: Wiscy and Iowa instead of SDSU... I mean, we are on a different level than the Ty years. It's just the same type of poont, only we're not recruiting guys ABSOLUTELY no one wants, we're recruiting guys that schools who have no access to decent WRs within their state boundaries want because they're desperate.
Fair? -
Naw, the big Seattle quake will wipe everyone out before that.Dennis_DeYoung said:
So, what you're saying is—at this rate—2641 will be special?ThomasFremont said:
Around here we call that incremental progress.Dennis_DeYoung said:
Except for the fact we're wasting scholarships.ThomasFremont said:
If you replaced Wisconsin, Iowa and BC with Utah St, San Diego St, and Fresno St you'd have a poont.Dennis_DeYoung said:
This was basically the standard poast during the Willingham years.bananasnblondes said:
What specifically do you hate about this player, or Quinten Pounds for that matter? You seem to be on this kick of whining about how much we suck and how much our recruited players suck but you don't offer any reasons why you don't like their play. The fact is, we're UW. We've sucked for over a decade now. It's not like Petersen has his pick of 6'4'' 4 and 5-star wide receivers who just have to be asked to come here. We're gonna have to take some B-level players, so why does this kid specifically suck compared to other B-level slot receivers? You already tried the speed thing and got your ass handed to you by another poster, so try something else.Dennis_DeYoung said:
Yeah, the issue in my opinion is that you NEVER take B-receivers like this. McClatcher? Fine. That dude has serious quickness. You can see a way forward. Renfro looks really good—Michael Crabtree type kid.HeretoBeatmyChest said:The guy might turn out to be good. Problem is he likely has no chance to be a #1 gamebreaker WR which is what we really need. Maybe we will get lucky and a few young WR's will be good. It just means we aren't doing so well with the higher rated guys.
Considering this class and past few years, Pete's UW could be UW in the early Lambo era....good defense, excellent lines, short on WR talent and gamebreakers on offense. String = Jason Shelly?
But Q-Pounds and all that crap? Why? You can move any idiot to WR and have a mediocre WR, you don't need to recruit them.
Here's what we know about the kid:
He scores a ton of TDs
He catches a ton of balls
He plays in a legit league
Wisconsin, Iowa, and BC wanted him. He visited Oklahoma, TCU, and Ok State recently
He's not amazing, but if you're gonna shit on him, at least back it up with something other than him not being as good as some of the elite receivers in teh west we can't get
It's a fucking WR...aka the LEAST important position on offense.
Until we have an offensive scheme, a QB, and an OL, it doesn't fucking matter.
You make a good poont re: Wiscy and Iowa instead of SDSU... I mean, we are on a different level than the Ty years. It's just the same type of poont, only we're not recruiting guys ABSOLUTELY no one wants, we're recruiting guys that schools who have no access to decent WRs within their state boundaries want because they're desperate.
Fair? -
Or we could LIPO with recruits who haven't played one snap of their senior year in high school?
-
Great poont. I'm sure Andrew Kirkland agrees—gotta wait for that senior year!!!CuntWaffle said:Or we could LIPO with recruits who haven't played one snap of their senior year in high school?
-
Serious Q: how does your first impression of him compare to your first impression of Pettis?Dennis_DeYoung said:
Yeah, the issue in my opinion is that you NEVER take B-receivers like this. McClatcher? Fine. That dude has serious quickness. You can see a way forward. Renfro looks really good—Michael Crabtree type kid.HeretoBeatmyChest said:The guy might turn out to be good. Problem is he likely has no chance to be a #1 gamebreaker WR which is what we really need. Maybe we will get lucky and a few young WR's will be good. It just means we aren't doing so well with the higher rated guys.
Considering this class and past few years, Pete's UW could be UW in the early Lambo era....good defense, excellent lines, short on WR talent and gamebreakers on offense. String = Jason Shelly?
But Q-Pounds and all that crap? Why? You can move any idiot to WR and have a mediocre WR, you don't need to recruit them. -
I loved Pettis right away. No joke.TTJ said:
Serious Q: how does your first impression of him compare to your first impression of Pettis?Dennis_DeYoung said:
Yeah, the issue in my opinion is that you NEVER take B-receivers like this. McClatcher? Fine. That dude has serious quickness. You can see a way forward. Renfro looks really good—Michael Crabtree type kid.HeretoBeatmyChest said:The guy might turn out to be good. Problem is he likely has no chance to be a #1 gamebreaker WR which is what we really need. Maybe we will get lucky and a few young WR's will be good. It just means we aren't doing so well with the higher rated guys.
Considering this class and past few years, Pete's UW could be UW in the early Lambo era....good defense, excellent lines, short on WR talent and gamebreakers on offense. String = Jason Shelly?
But Q-Pounds and all that crap? Why? You can move any idiot to WR and have a mediocre WR, you don't need to recruit them.
I thought he was fantastic. I had a similar reaction to Pettis and Steve Frank, "kid is an overlooked baller". Pettis just knows how to play football. Not outstanding physical characteristics, but jumped out on film. -
Andre Kirkland = SarkDennis_DeYoung said:
Great poont. I'm sure Andrew Kirkland agrees—gotta wait for that senior year!!!CuntWaffle said:Or we could LIPO with recruits who haven't played one snap of their senior year in high school?
Big difference. -
Huge difference! Cannot be overstated! HUGE!CuntWaffle said:
Andre Kirkland = SarkDennis_DeYoung said:
Great poont. I'm sure Andrew Kirkland agrees—gotta wait for that senior year!!!CuntWaffle said:Or we could LIPO with recruits who haven't played one snap of their senior year in high school?
Big difference. -
You're going to upset Puppy by making a football post.ThomasFremont said:
If you replaced Wisconsin, Iowa and BC with Utah St, San Diego St, and Fresno St you'd have a poont.Dennis_DeYoung said:
This was basically the standard poast during the Willingham years.bananasnblondes said:
What specifically do you hate about this player, or Quinten Pounds for that matter? You seem to be on this kick of whining about how much we suck and how much our recruited players suck but you don't offer any reasons why you don't like their play. The fact is, we're UW. We've sucked for over a decade now. It's not like Petersen has his pick of 6'4'' 4 and 5-star wide receivers who just have to be asked to come here. We're gonna have to take some B-level players, so why does this kid specifically suck compared to other B-level slot receivers? You already tried the speed thing and got your ass handed to you by another poster, so try something else.Dennis_DeYoung said:
Yeah, the issue in my opinion is that you NEVER take B-receivers like this. McClatcher? Fine. That dude has serious quickness. You can see a way forward. Renfro looks really good—Michael Crabtree type kid.HeretoBeatmyChest said:The guy might turn out to be good. Problem is he likely has no chance to be a #1 gamebreaker WR which is what we really need. Maybe we will get lucky and a few young WR's will be good. It just means we aren't doing so well with the higher rated guys.
Considering this class and past few years, Pete's UW could be UW in the early Lambo era....good defense, excellent lines, short on WR talent and gamebreakers on offense. String = Jason Shelly?
But Q-Pounds and all that crap? Why? You can move any idiot to WR and have a mediocre WR, you don't need to recruit them.
Here's what we know about the kid:
He scores a ton of TDs
He catches a ton of balls
He plays in a legit league
Wisconsin, Iowa, and BC wanted him. He visited Oklahoma, TCU, and Ok State recently
He's not amazing, but if you're gonna shit on him, at least back it up with something other than him not being as good as some of the elite receivers in teh west we can't get
It's a fucking WR...aka the LEAST important position on offense.
Until we have an offensive scheme, a QB, and an OL, it doesn't fucking matter. -
Dennis_DeYoung said:
Great poont. I'm sure Taylor Hindy agrees—gotta wait for that senior year!!!CuntWaffle said:Or we could LIPO with recruits who haven't played one snap of their senior year in high school?
