Gaard w/Greder

Donate To GopherHole
Gophers_4life said:
I see. So as a junior, he almost beat the starter out so much ... that he didn’t play as a junior.

https://gophersports.com/roster.aspx?rp_id=1046



Note a complete lack of stats for junior year.

What does it mean to almost beat someone out??
Click to expand...
I'm going has multiple teams I am sure like in most programs, the backups played on some sort of JV team

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk
 

Gophers_4life said:
He didn’t win the starting job as a senior, the other guy beat him out. Just as ZA has beaten out TM this year.

You’re not wrong, nor did I ever claim differently, that ZA got to start later in the year.
Click to expand...
He got to start because he WON back the job by being better

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk
 

My question:

If he beat out a 4-star in high school to start, why was he still a 3-star?
 




Section2 said:
Because you can win the job in a number of different ways. ZA won the job at IMG on the field, not in fall camp. It does require context and does have multiple definitions, that's why you stating that it's "false" that ZA won the job is WRONG.

You did present yourself that way.

What's the third option?

He BOTH got beat out in fall camp, and beat out Sitowski during the season. Which is more important, winning the job because of politics or in practice, or being the better player in games?

So you don't have an opinion on how good he is, but don't like that others are optimistic, or think there are valid reasons to think he will be good, or a big improvement over last year. It's such a typical MN fan take.
Click to expand...

You can win the job a number of ways, I agree. So for example, it's not wrong to say that the other senior at IMG last year won the job because he beat out ZA at the start of the year. Looks like we're in agreement.

I did not present myself that way.

It's in my post, go read it.

Because of politics?? Now that's something new that I didn't hear before. Care to elaborate?

I'm reserving my right to judge until we've actually seen him play. And that is perfectly consistent with disagree with others being excessively optimistic.


If you're so hard up to keep going on this pissing match, then PM me.
 


Gophers_4life said:
You can win the job a number of ways, I agree. So for example, it's not wrong to say that the other senior at IMG last year won the job because he beat out ZA at the start of the year. Looks like we're in agreement.

I did not present myself that way.

It's in my post, go read it.

Because of politics?? Now that's something new that I didn't hear before. Care to elaborate?

I'm reserving my right to judge until we've actually seen him play. And that is perfectly consistent with disagree with others being excessively optimistic.


If you're so hard up to keep going on this pissing match, then PM me.
Click to expand...
Politics can be explained pretty easily. Kid transferred in, it's not out of the realm of possibility that promises were made behind closed doors, the coach praising Zach for competing could also be a backhanded dig at the other kid, it also may not be, but it's possible. As a youth and high school hockey coach, I've sat in plenty of eval rooms during tryouts, and to call those environments political is the understatement of the year

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk
 

OK, I get it. I thought we were talking about republicans vs Democrats or something. You’re just generally saying, negatively evaluate against a player for any reason not related to physical performance.

Sure, could happen.
 




Gophers_4life said:
It's in my post, go read it.
Click to expand...

Where?

Gophers_4life said:
Presenting only these two options, as an “either or”, is false, in my opinion.

Going into fall camp 2018, we only had two candidates to be the starting QB. Both freshmen with zero game experience. It’s impossible to see that situation as anything other than a failure by the coaching staff(s) in the past. It should never have gotten to that point.

But recognizing that, in no possible way then forces one to preclude that ZA won the competition over TM. I do recognize that. I am NOT trying to say that I think TM or VV would be a better or more worthy starter.
Click to expand...
 

This is the definition of an "argument for the sake of arguing."

There isn't one reader that doesn't know what it means to almost beat out another athlete, almost win the starting job, ect. But people on here love to argue and in the end no stone will be left unturned in search of a juicy argument worm.

I am learning a lot about ZA these last few days and I like what I see. In a season where I am not expecting a lot of wins, it will hopefully be fun to track his improvement and growth.
 

Schnauzer said:
This is the definition of an "argument for the sake of arguing."

There isn't one reader that doesn't know what it means to almost beat out another athlete, almost win the starting job, ect. But people on here love to argue and in the end no stone will be left unturned in search of a juicy argument worm.

I am learning a lot about ZA these last few days and I like what I see. In a season where I am not expecting a lot of wins, it will hopefully be fun to track his improvement and growth.
Click to expand...

Well said.
 



If you think ZA will be good, great, terrible, ok, that's great. that's a prediction. You might be right, and you might be wrong, and that's the fun part of prognosticating.

I am absolutely intolerant of people who rip on others predictions or optimism, while cowardly "reserving theirs". If you don't have an opinion, shut up. And if you're going to be the arbiter or truth, you better be immaculate.
 

Schnauzer said:
This is the definition of an "argument for the sake of arguing."
Click to expand...

... that’s what a message board is, frankly. It’s people who want to be heard, for the sake of being heard, and have nowhere else to be heard. You’re just as guilty ... hence why you posted.

If you just want to read info, then read the newspapers. If you come in here, expect and know that you’ll read something you don’t agree with, don’t like, and/or think shouldn’t have been said. Too bad, that’s the fabric of what it is.

I am learning a lot about ZA these last few days and I like what I see. In a season where I am not expecting a lot of wins, it will hopefully be fun to track his improvement and growth.
Click to expand...

Me too! I don’t think I’ve read anything on here disagreeing with this.
 


Gophers_4life said:
... that’s what a message board is, frankly. It’s people who want to be heard, for the sake of being heard, and have nowhere else to be heard. You’re just as guilty ... hence why you posted.

If you just want to read info, then read the newspapers. If you come in here, expect and know that you’ll read something you don’t agree with, don’t like, and/or think shouldn’t have been said. Too bad, that’s the fabric of what it is.
Click to expand...


I figured someone would want to argue with me for saying this was arguing for the sake of arguing.

I’ve been posting here for nearly 10 years so thanks for the lesson on what this site is. That should grow my experience.
 

You’ve been posting for 10 years, yet all you had to contribute was to complain that people were arguing?

You keep doing you :cool:
 

Nice to hear Zack’s old coach confirm some of the character traits that some us were guessing based upon his willingness to take on challenges. Hopefully, it makes him a special player.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Gophers_4life said:
You’ve been posting for 10 years, yet all you had to contribute was to complain that people were arguing?

You keep doing you :cool:
Click to expand...

Of course you were the one that was arguing for sake of arguing, and I called it out. You then doubled down to attempt to call me out for calling that out. I can see where many of your nearly 500 posts in two months probably came from, and where they are going. After calling out the arguing for the sake of arguing, I also added comments about how I am looking forward to watching our new QB play. So, you are both incorrect and arguing for the sake of arguing. Shame on me for engaging as I usually know better when it comes to feeding trolls.
 

Schnauzer said:
Of course you were the one that was arguing for sake of arguing, and I called it out. You then doubled down to attempt to call me out for calling that out. I can see where many of your nearly 500 posts in two months probably came from, and where they are going. After calling out the arguing for the sake of arguing, I also added comments about how I am looking forward to watching our new QB play. So, you are both incorrect and arguing for the sake of arguing. Shame on me for engaging as I usually know better when it comes to feeding trolls.
Click to expand...

That's the typical thing on an internet message board, if you don't like someone or what they say, call them a troll.

You haven't read very many of my posts. Most are not arguing for the sake of arguing, though some might qualify for that. Again, both kinds are perfectly valid for message boards -- the electronic version of water cooler chit-chat. Good day!
 

Gophers_4life said:
That's the typical thing on an internet message board, if you don't like someone or what they say, call them a troll.

You haven't read very many of my posts. Most are not arguing for the sake of arguing, though some might qualify for that. Again, both kinds are perfectly valid for message boards -- the electronic version of water cooler chit-chat. Good day!
Click to expand...

Your whole thread about why PJ gave Zack a PWO was arguing just for the sake of arguing!
https://youtu.be/wxrbOVeRonQ
 
Last edited:

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom