Being Raided

#51
#51
tim said:
No... I got the point. Despite what you may think of CPF he has recruited well and has passed on local talent, for better talent. His recruiting has given TN the best winning PCT. in the SEC. I dont think that missing a recruit here and there in TN has hurt us at all. TN is not, repeat, not a hotbed for talent. When a kid from TN is playing qb for AL and he beats us I will probably be a little disappointed, but it hasnt happened and I dont see it happening anytime soon.
Click to expand...

does the name Steve Spurrier ring a bell? it wasnt Bama, but Florida's just as bad.
 
#53
#53
I also hate it when we lost that elite player named Patrick Turner to USC and had to play that other in-state WR named Austin Rogers. You might want to look at those two players numbers for this season. Rogers are better.
 
#54
#54
therickbol said:
I also hate it when we lost that elite player named Patrick Turner to USC and had to play that other in-state WR named Austin Rogers. You might want to look at those two players numbers for this season. Rogers are better.
Click to expand...

which proves numbers aren't everything
 
#56
#56
JZVOL said:
:eek:lol: Yea way to pull an example from 40 years ago...
Click to expand...

I'm not sure you followed the line of thought in this thread. There was a post earlier where someone was complaining about Fulmer losing in-state talent. They used Spurrier as an example. My post was sarcastic. Fulmer was obviously not the head coach when Spurrier was being recruited.
 
#57
#57
KCVolLaw said:
which proves numbers aren't everything
Click to expand...

Oh, I thought numbers where what they used to decide the winners and losers of games. The person with the biggest number next to their name on the scoreboard wins. Have they changed that process this year? Turner has had every opportunity that Rogers has had this year. And he has tons of talent around him at QB, OL, RB but yet has caught fewer balls for fewer yards this year. I would not trade Rogers for Turner right now.

He is taller, stronger, and about the same speed as Rogers. Oh yeah, and rivals gave him more stars. So Turner is obviously a better WR? Wrong.

Your theory is that Turner would be more productive at UT because of .....what?
 
#58
#58
therickbol said:
I'm not sure you followed the line of thought in this thread. There was a post earlier where someone was complaining about Fulmer losing in-state talent. They used Spurrier as an example. My post was sarcastic. Fulmer was obviously not the head coach when Spurrier was being recruited.
Click to expand...

I was laughing with you, not at you.
 
#62
#62
therickbol said:
Oh, I thought numbers where what they used to decide the winners and losers of games. The person with the biggest number next to their name on the scoreboard wins. Have they changed that process this year? Turner has had every opportunity that Rogers has had this year. And he has tons of talent around him at QB, OL, RB but yet has caught fewer balls for fewer yards this year. I would not trade Rogers for Turner right now.

He is taller, stronger, and about the same speed as Rogers. Oh yeah, and rivals gave him more stars. So Turner is obviously a better WR? Wrong.

Your theory is that Turner would be more productive at UT because of .....what?
Click to expand...

Hey you're right, numbers are used to decide the score of games which has nothing to do with what I'm talking about. You said it yourself...Turner is taller, stronger, and prob faster than Rogers. Why wouldn't you rather have a better athlete? I'm sure if he was here he'd be putting up bigger numbers than Rogers would. But that's my opinion and you have yours.
 
#63
#63
KCVolLaw said:
Hey you're right, numbers are used to decide the score of games which has nothing to do with what I'm talking about. You said it yourself...Turner is taller, stronger, and prob faster than Rogers. Why wouldn't you rather have a better athlete? I'm sure if he was here he'd be putting up bigger numbers than Rogers would. But that's my opinion and you have yours.
Click to expand...

Please explain how Turner would be doing better if he were a Vol. I just don't see it.
 
#65
#65
KCVolLaw said:
because he's better than Rogers...it's not that hard
Click to expand...

He's got a QB that is even with Ainge (it's a push, maybe slightly better, slightly worse). He plays with much more WR talent around him (Hazelton, Ausberry, the TE) to keep teams from doubling up on him and still is behind Rogers statistically.

Now how is it he's better? He might be a better athlete than Rogers, but right now Rogers is the better WR.
 
#66
#66
justingroves said:
He's got a QB that is even with Ainge (it's a push, maybe slightly better, slightly worse). He plays with much more WR talent around him (Hazelton, Ausberry, the TE) to keep teams from doubling up on him and still is behind Rogers statistically.

Now how is it he's better? He might be a better athlete than Rogers, but right now Rogers is the better WR.
Click to expand...

The only thing I've said is he is a better athlete (most likely true) and he would be better as a Vol than Rogers is (which is strictly opinion). There are many things that can constitute as better. If you are talking numbers then I guess Rogers is "better".
 
#67
#67
Ok, no problem. I'll give you the better athlete. I'll take the better WR. I win. I am amazed at the people that continue to think the equation is as simple as athlete=football player. So what if Turner is taller and more athletic (btw, he is not faster)? Rogers is a better WR and that is all that matters in between the sidelines on Saturdays.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top