What grade would you give Gophers Conor Rhoda in his first career start?

[Spoofin]

Oh please, the post is all about that. Moving forward is much different than long-term. I like how you slowly massage your posts...

I think you forget what our original debate was about. I get you want to keep it going, but it is over.

I said Demry would start if Mitch went down - regardless of what the depth chart said. You said no, Rhoda would. I have said I was wrong - multiple times since you seem to forget - and that you were right. Not sure what else you want.

I'm also not sure why that means I now need to think Rhoda is good. He did fine, but didn't make me confident in him moving forward, long-term, or however you want to say it. Whether I think he is better, worse, or the same as Demry, Seth, Williams, or you for that matter is independent of my view that he doesn't look to be a long term solution.

Hell, I even put "IMO" in my post - but if you want to keep this going for some reason I can't stop you. Carry on.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[MNVCGUY]

Why is Rhoda getting so much credit for the win in this thread? Teams can win games despite the play of their quarterback, which is exactly what the Gophers did. He played poorly.

That is a football thing in general. The QB usually gets all the credit when a team wins and all the blame when a team loses. Although here we also have a third set when it comes to Leidner that will also blame him after a win, that one is kind of unique to Gopherhole but the first one applies to football across the board.

 

[short ornery norwegian]

To clarify my earlier point:

I was trying to use sarcasm to point out that no Gopher QB seems to be able to earn the praise of the Gopher Hole crew. No matter what a QB does, he gets criticized - often far out of proportion to his role in winning or losing the game.

Let me say it as clearly as I can - Gopher Fans - and Gopher Hole fans in particular - have wildly over-inflated expectations of the QB position. You don't - or shouldn't - expect a pickup truck to drive like a Porsche. We're not talking about 4* and 5* can't-miss prospects here. Maybe someday, if the Gophers ever recruit a true top-flight QB, we can change our expectations.

IMHO, Rhoda was adequate on Saturday - nothing more, nothing less. I would agree with Spoofin that Rhoda does not look like a long-term solution to me.

 

[PMWinSTP]

I think you forget what our original debate was about. I get you want to keep it going, but it is over.

I said Demry would start if Mitch went down - regardless of what the depth chart said. You said no, Rhoda would. I have said I was wrong - multiple times since you seem to forget - and that you were right. Not sure what else you want.

I'm also not sure why that means I now need to think Rhoda is good. He did fine, but didn't make me confident in him moving forward, long-term, or however you want to say it. Whether I think he is better, worse, or the same as Demry, Seth, Williams, or you for that matter is independent of my view that he doesn't look to be a long term solution.

Hell, I even put "IMO" in my post - but if you want to keep this going for some reason I can't stop you. Carry on.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Haven't forgot anything. Rhoda's a Sr next year, so not long-term. Demry and Green are long-term. He's been listed as the backup all season, he's the starter now so by definition he is the best option now, and moving forward. Big difference between that and long-term. You actually think TC wouldn't play his best option with his and all his assistants jobs on the line? Love the passive-aggressive too...carry on.

 

[Spoofin]

Haven't forgot anything. Rhoda's a Sr next year, so not long-term. Demry and Green are long-term. He's been listed as the backup all season, he's the starter now so by definition he is the best option now, and moving forward. Big difference between that and long-term. You actually think TC wouldn't play his best option with his and all his assistants jobs on the line? Love the passive-aggressive too...carry on.

I see. I was wrong - You don't want to argue, but rather you are unhappy with what you see as an injustice on my use of the term "moving forward" versus "long term". Because "moving forward" can't mean "post Liedner" and because "long term" can't include next year. You got me - Rhoda can't start after next year. Great point and wonderful insight. Do you ever wonder why you aren't invited to parties?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[PMWinSTP]

I see. I was wrong - You don't want to argue, but rather you are unhappy with what you see as an injustice on my use of the term "moving forward" versus "long term". Because "moving forward" can't mean "post Liedner" and because "long term" can't include next year. You got me - Rhoda can't start after next year. Great point and wonderful insight. Do you ever wonder why you aren't invited to parties?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Hmmm, OK...when most people I know use "moving forward" they mean starting immediately...guess we've been using it wrong all these years. Thanks for clarifying.

Gosh, that's so hurtful...I love parties.