TobaccoRoadEagle {l Wrote}:andy katz wants to take the bc program behind the middle school and get it pregnant...
auggiebc {l Wrote}:I put it in my signature. it's that good.
Eagledom {l Wrote}:This quote was interesting:
"We've got eight guys who can legitimately play and two others that might have to figure it out. So let's go. You don't need more than eight anyway.''
Eagledom {l Wrote}:auggiebc {l Wrote}:I put it in my signature. it's that good.
Except that you left out the part where he totally throws 2 of his players under the bus.
cvilleagle {l Wrote}:Eagledom {l Wrote}:This quote was interesting:
"We've got eight guys who can legitimately play and two others that might have to figure it out. So let's go. You don't need more than eight anyway.''
Wow. He is so the anti-spaz/TOB. I love it.
auggiebc {l Wrote}:Eagledom {l Wrote}:auggiebc {l Wrote}:I put it in my signature. it's that good.
Except that you left out the part where he totally throws 2 of his players under the bus.
he's just talking straight. it's wonderful. Al's here to win this year, he's not here to patronize his players. If anything, it's good motivation for the kids.
Eagledom {l Wrote}:auggiebc {l Wrote}:Eagledom {l Wrote}:auggiebc {l Wrote}:I put it in my signature. it's that good.
Except that you left out the part where he totally throws 2 of his players under the bus.
he's just talking straight. it's wonderful. Al's here to win this year, he's not here to patronize his players. If anything, it's good motivation for the kids.
Yeah - saying they are not legit options is really good motivation. If Spaz said this exact same think he would get murdered for throwing the players under the bus. This opposite spin in this case is just hilarious.
commavegarage {l Wrote}:Al is throwing players under the bus in a completely different context. He isn't using them as a reason for a loss or being a bad team, he is saying we can win without them. This is a completely different context. If you can't see that you're an idiot.
Eagledom {l Wrote}:commavegarage {l Wrote}:Al is throwing players under the bus in a completely different context. He isn't using them as a reason for a loss or being a bad team, he is saying we can win without them. This is a completely different context. If you can't see that you're an idiot.
A. I have never seen Spaz throw the players under the bus in referencing the reason for a loss. So nice try.
B. Your first sentence is priceless. "Its ok to throw the players under the bus in the correct context..."
C. This was ridiculously stupid thing to see no matter how you cut it. Its not like these are walk-ons that don't ever expect to play.
eepstein0 {l Wrote}:A. Spaz threw our entire team under the bus before we even took the field at VT and Clemson for that matter.
Paris
Sanders
Raji
Trapani
Southern
Jackson
Roche
Dunn
Ravenel
Elmore and the rest of the crew won't play. Al never plays more than 8 players anyway so assuming Tyler Roche never plays PF those 8/9 players look fine to me.Eagledom {l Wrote}:commavegarage {l Wrote}:Al is throwing players under the bus in a completely different context. He isn't using them as a reason for a loss or being a bad team, he is saying we can win without them. This is a completely different context. If you can't see that you're an idiot.
A. I have never seen Spaz throw the players under the bus in referencing the reason for a loss. So nice try.
B. Your first sentence is priceless. "Its ok to throw the players under the bus in the correct context..."
C. This was ridiculously stupid thing to see no matter how you cut it. Its not like these are walk-ons that don't ever expect to play.
Eagledom {l Wrote}:commavegarage {l Wrote}:Al is throwing players under the bus in a completely different context. He isn't using them as a reason for a loss or being a bad team, he is saying we can win without them. This is a completely different context. If you can't see that you're an idiot.
A. I have never seen Spaz throw the players under the bus in referencing the reason for a loss. So nice try.
B. Your first sentence is priceless. "Its ok to throw the players under the bus in the correct context..."
C. This was ridiculously stupid thing to see no matter how you cut it. Its not like these are walk-ons that don't ever expect to play.
commavegarage {l Wrote}:Eagledom {l Wrote}:commavegarage {l Wrote}:Al is throwing players under the bus in a completely different context. He isn't using them as a reason for a loss or being a bad team, he is saying we can win without them. This is a completely different context. If you can't see that you're an idiot.
A. I have never seen Spaz throw the players under the bus in referencing the reason for a loss. So nice try.
B. Your first sentence is priceless. "Its ok to throw the players under the bus in the correct context..."
C. This was ridiculously stupid thing to see no matter how you cut it. Its not like these are walk-ons that don't ever expect to play.
1. Let me correct the first sentence. He isn't throwing players under the bus. Happy now?
2. I'm comparing Al to the Spaz/Toby idea. Spaz has not been in charge for a long time and we've already seen a lot of Tobyisms. Give it time.
Here is my revised statement:
Al isn't throwing players under the bus. He isn't using them as a reason for a loss or being a bad team, he is saying we can win without them. This is a completely different context. OJ, you are an idiot.
Happy?
commavegarage {l Wrote}:First, you are OJ because you are OJ and you are racist. That's just the truth.
Second, do you really think that if Spaz said prior to the Tuggle/Haden transfer that we don't need them because we can and should win every game without them, people here would be complaining? No. They would be thrilled. You aren't understanding what's going on here 1969, Al pretty much says we are going to have a great season and if they want to come along for the ride and grow, fine, but if not, we can and will do fine without them.
TobaccoRoadEagle {l Wrote}:Eagledom {l Wrote}:commavegarage {l Wrote}:Eagledom {l Wrote}:commavegarage {l Wrote}:Al is throwing players under the bus in a completely different context. He isn't using them as a reason for a loss or being a bad team, he is saying we can win without them. This is a completely different context. If you can't see that you're an idiot.
A. I have never seen Spaz throw the players under the bus in referencing the reason for a loss. So nice try.
B. Your first sentence is priceless. "Its ok to throw the players under the bus in the correct context..."
C. This was ridiculously stupid thing to see no matter how you cut it. Its not like these are walk-ons that don't ever expect to play.
1. Let me correct the first sentence. He isn't throwing players under the bus. Happy now?
2. I'm comparing Al to the Spaz/Toby idea. Spaz has not been in charge for a long time and we've already seen a lot of Tobyisms. Give it time.
Here is my revised statement:
Al isn't throwing players under the bus. He isn't using them as a reason for a loss or being a bad team, he is saying we can win without them. This is a completely different context. OJ, you are an idiot.
Happy?
So I call out Al on a horribly ridiculous quote and because of that I am OJ? You are really bright.
This quote is the DEFINITION of throwing players under the bus. He directly says that Elmore and Ravenel are not legitimate players. That is terrific coaching and motivation. If Spaz said this exact quote, I can't even imagine the posts that would follow. Your sig says all I need to know.
i don't have the exact quote, but didn't spaz comment during his halftime interview at the clemson game that we didn't have the personnel necessary at qb and "that it could get ugly"
Eagledom {l Wrote}:commavegarage {l Wrote}:First, you are OJ because you are OJ and you are racist. That's just the truth.
Second, do you really think that if Spaz said prior to the Tuggle/Haden transfer that we don't need them because we can and should win every game without them, people here would be complaining? No. They would be thrilled. You aren't understanding what's going on here 1969, Al pretty much says we are going to have a great season and if they want to come along for the ride and grow, fine, but if not, we can and will do fine without them.
Moron - you are comparing two guys that are transferring with two guys that are still part of the team. Wow, you are stupid.
Al is bashing two players, basically by name. Dick move any way you try to spin it. Very classy move by the coach.
BC923 {l Wrote}:one of the players he was talking about is clearly the goofy white kid on the bench (not roche). M something.
commavegarage {l Wrote}:Eagledom {l Wrote}:commavegarage {l Wrote}:First, you are OJ because you are OJ and you are racist. That's just the truth.
Second, do you really think that if Spaz said prior to the Tuggle/Haden transfer that we don't need them because we can and should win every game without them, people here would be complaining? No. They would be thrilled. You aren't understanding what's going on here 1969, Al pretty much says we are going to have a great season and if they want to come along for the ride and grow, fine, but if not, we can and will do fine without them.
Moron - you are comparing two guys that are transferring with two guys that are still part of the team. Wow, you are stupid.
Al is bashing two players, basically by name. Dick move any way you try to spin it. Very classy move by the coach.
Okay, lets say he did it to Boek and McMichael. Players who contribute very little as is. If he said they have potential but we should and will win without them would you be pissed?
And SpazToby did say that at halftime of the Clemson game.
apbc12 {l Wrote}:Leave it to basketball season and an Al Skinner discussion to remove even the slightest doubt that Eagledom is OJ.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 145 guests