Bowling Green interested in Bajakian

#327
#327
Spartacavolus said:
People that are focused on his best staff in America comment are so full of **** its ridiculous. Never seen a simple statement by a coach, that is trying to rebuild a program and sell to recruits, taken so literal.
I assume you want him to tell the world he has concerns and is not sure how this will turn out. That would be brilliant for recruiting, wouldn't it. Brilliant for the whiny asses on here to pick apart at best. Same posters want him to tell the world his coaching staff sucks after an L.
Best coach in America blew the sec championship game with multiple 4 th quarter coaching errors. Coaches aren't perfect, especially when they have inferior talent.
Click to expand...
The man wasn't simply speaking to a group at the Big Orange Caravan...idiot. He said it at his initial press conference. The entire country could watch it on ESPN. It communicated the notion that he would aggressively seek out the best assistants and put together an All-Star staff. Not even close. He knew all along he was putting his band back together, in Knoxville. Not forming a new one.

There was no generality nor ambiguity to it. Hart gave him a fat budget so he could be aggressive. Instead, he takes the budget intended for Class A level coaches (ones who have been successful at power conferences like the SEC, PAC 12, Big Ten, etc.), and gave it to his Class B level assistants from Cincinnati/Big East.

It was a very deceptive gesture on his part...and even though I like CBJ, on the whole, that was a d!ck move. As I said before, he could have just been honest and said "this staff will largely consist of the same assistants, as I prefer to stick with those who helped get us where we were, in Cincinnati." But he didn't.

That is a far cry from coming out right and saying "I'm going to hire the BEST STAFF IN THE COUNTRY." You just hate it because we are right (to hold him to his words), and that's what is chapping your arse. That the performance of the Coordinators, this past season, solidifies our position/concerns.

Going in, I was most concerned about Janzek. Bajakian, I thought would be better than what we saw. I still think he might be a decent OC, but that Vandy game drove the nail in the coffin, for me. I have NEVER, EVER seen such a scared bunch of coaches in my life. Fulmer could be that way often, but not like this.

It was them taking chances, in the UGA game, that got us back into the game (cause Janzek's squad was laying down for the mutts). Against Vandy, it was just the opposite. They played not to lose...afraid to pass at all. Afraid to get creative, in order to sustain drives...rather than just keep trying to run up the gut, play after play.

I don't want a coach who is paralyzed by fear. Simple as that. I didn't see that, when I watched their games at Cincinnati. Bajakian and perhaps Butch, too...just packed it in, for the Vandy game.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 people
#330
#330
VOLorNuttin said:
The man wasn't simply speaking to a group at the Big Orange Caravan...idiot. He said it at his initial press conference. The entire country could watch it on ESPN. It communicated the notion that he would aggressively seek out the best assistants and put together an All-Star staff. Not even close. He knew all along he was putting his band back together, in Knoxville. Not forming a new one.

There was no generality nor ambiguity to it. Hart gave him a fat budget so he could be aggressive. Instead, he takes the budget intended for Class A level coaches (ones who have been successful at power conferences like the SEC, PAC 12, Big Ten, etc.), and gave it to his Class B level assistants from Cincinnati/Big East.

It was a very deceptive gesture on his part...and even though I like CBJ, on the whole, that was a d!ck move. As I said before, he could have just been honest and said "this staff will largely consist of the same assistants, as I prefer to stick with those who helped get us where we were, in Cincinnati." But he didn't.

That is a far cry from coming out right and saying "I'm going to hire the BEST STAFF IN THE COUNTRY." You just hate it because we are right (to hold him to his words), and that's what is chapping your arse. That the performance of the Coordinators, this past season, solidifies our position/concerns.

Going in, I was most concerned about Janzek. Bajakian, I thought would be better than what we saw. I still think he might be a decent OC, but that Vandy game drove the nail in the coffin, for me. I have NEVER, EVER seen such a scared bunch of coaches in my life. Fulmer could be that way often, but not like this.

It was them taking chances, in the UGA game, that got us back into the game (cause Janzek's squad was laying down for the mutts). Against Vandy, it was just the opposite. They played not to lose...afraid to pass at all. Afraid to get creative, in order to sustain drives...rather than just keep trying to run up the gut, play after play.

I don't want a coach who is paralyzed by fear. Simple as that. I didn't see that, when I watched their games at Cincinnati. Bajakian and perhaps Butch, too...just packed it in, for the Vandy game.
Click to expand...

Maybe in his opinion he has the best staff in America. I'd take his opinion over yours any day of the week.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 5 people
#331
#331
Spartacavolus said:
Target of yours? Who gives a flip. He's a target of dumbasses daily. Not saying you are one. Just figure it out.
Click to expand...
Talk about the pot calling the kettle black. :loco: Your dumb a$$ was drinking the Dool-Aid about this time last year, and calling Sunseri a tough SOB, who would instill some discipline in the defense....just months before that. :crazy: Shows how much weight your measly opinion carries.

You b!tch and wail when others question certain coaches or their decisions, and then when they are fired, you jump on the bandwagon, with those you hazed all year long. You're so full of Fail, it's pathetic.
 

Attachments

  • jackass-fireworks.gif
    jackass-fireworks.gif
    820.6 KB · Views: 103
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#332
#332
I don't know much about Bajakian, but I know enough to be of the opinion that he isn't a good fit at UT.
 
#334
#334
VOLorNuttin said:
Talk about the pot calling the kettle black. :loco:

Who gives two sh!tz about your lame opinion?
Click to expand...


When knee jerk, drama queen, clowns like you are on here calling people like me an idiot for this debate over a coach talking about his coaching staff, it's standard ff material.
I don't care if you don't like or don't want to read my opinion. I'm giving it anyway, and I'm not ever going to act like a whiny beatch over coachspeak. Of course, I didn't peak in teeball either.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 6 people
#337
#337
VOLorNuttin said:
Talk about the pot calling the kettle black. :loco: Your dumb a$$ was drinking the Dool-Aid about this time last year, and calling Sunseri a tough SOB, who would instill some discipline in the defense....just months before that. :crazy: Shows how much weight your measly opinion carries.

You b!tch and wail when others question certain coaches or their decisions, and then when they are fired, you jump on the bandwagon, with those you hazed all year long. You're so full of Fail, it's pathetic.
Click to expand...


-bs on the Dooley bit, again (there is another UT site for habitual liars. I suggest you go find it)
-never said anything about Sunseri instilling discipline. Sal and the word discipline has never been in my thought process. Saw a good D against NC state and commented on it. Never saw the same D again.
-I question coaching gameplan and game decisions all the time. I just don't act like an emotional basket case and make it personal.

If you want to debate, bring it. If you want to act like a punk with a bunch of bs like above, gfy. Again.
 
#338
#338
VOLorNuttin said:
Oh...it's just you. Please explain how your history as a Dool-Aid drinker and founder of the Sal Sunseri fanclub gives you special insight into all things UT Football? :drive2:
Click to expand...

You want to circle back around and explain how the above misinformation makes "best" and "better" anything but relative, subjective terms?

Come on. Circle back around and deal with the argument instead of living in ad hominum land.

Since we're back to the argument about subjectivity, can you see now the irony of your statement about opinions?


haha...


Muhahahaha!


(If you can't see the irony in that, we'll move on to the irony of you calling anyone else an idiot.)
 
#341
#341
Spartacavolus said:
When knee jerk, drama queen, clowns like you are on here calling people like me an idiot for this debate over a coach talking about his coaching staff, it's standard ff material.
I don't care if you don't like or don't want to read my opinion. I'm giving it anyway, and I'm not ever going to act like a whiny beatch over coachspeak. Of course, I didn't peak in teeball either.
Click to expand...
Yeah...we were all drama queens, and whiny b!tches for calling for Dooley to be shown the door sooner, rather than later...and for questioning the decision to hire a career position coach (your pal, Sal) as his DC, and switch defensive schemes during his make or break season? Dingleberries like you were saying the same BS then, as you are now.

Sucks to be wrong, doesn't it? I mean totally wrong. Not just a little. It doesn't bother you that you gave people a hard time. People who, unlike you, actually had a clue. You can shove it up your arse sideways, as far as I'm concerned.
 
#343
#343
VOLorNuttin said:
Yeah...we were all drama queens, and whiny b!tches for calling for Dooley to be shown the door sooner, rather than later...and for questioning the decision to hire a career position coach (your pal, Sal) as his DC, and switch defensive schemes during his make or break season? Dingleberries like you were saying the same BS then, as you are now.

Sucks to be wrong, doesn't it? I mean totally wrong. Not just a little. It doesn't bother you that you gave people who, unlike you, actually had a clue. You can shove it up your arse sideways, as far as I'm concerned.
Click to expand...

How does Dooley or Sunseri have anything to do the subjectivity of certain words in the English language? You want to have this discussion or continue misconstruing arguments from three years ago?
 
#346
#346
VOLorNuttin said:
Yeah...we were all drama queens, and whiny b!tches for calling for Dooley to be shown the door
Click to expand...

You were all that and more - so now that I'm gone STFU AND LEAVE ME ALONE!

ANTS-IN-THE-PANTS.gif
 
#347
#347
Orange_Crush said:
You want to circle back around and explain how the above misinformation makes "best" and "better" anything but relative, subjective terms?

Come on. Circle back around and deal with the argument instead of living in ad hominum land.

Since we're back to the argument about subjectivity, can you see now the irony of your statement about opinions?


haha...


Muhahahaha!


(If you can't see the irony in that, we'll move on to the irony of you calling anyone else an idiot.)
Click to expand...
You mean come back and listen to an idiot (like you) who called those of us who weren't happy about either Kiffin's hiring or Dooley's (neither had a winning resume to commend them to the position), NegaVols?

You were, and continue to be on the losing end of the argument, and yet you still come back here to the scene of the crime, to talk more sh!ite? :loco:
 
#348
#348
VOLorNuttin said:
Yeah...we were all drama queens, and whiny b!tches for calling for Dooley to be shown the door sooner, rather than later...and for questioning the decision to hire a career position coach (your pal, Sal) as his DC, and switch defensive schemes during his make or break season? Dingleberries like you were saying the same BS then, as you are now.

Sucks to be wrong, doesn't it? I mean totally wrong. Not just a little. It doesn't bother you that you gave people who, unlike you, actually had a clue. You can shove it up your arse sideways, as far as I'm concerned.
Click to expand...


Not whiny because of your opinion. Whiny because that's what you do. Whine, repeat, whine more, then makeup bs to support your stupid ass. You can't post without flat out making **** up either. Switching defensive schemes was obviously a bad move. wtf does that have to do with anything. Was I coaching? My pal Sal? I was in Randy Shannon camp. Wanted him badly.
Guys like you pat yourselves on the back for saying Dooley was going to suck and have to revisit it 3 yrs later. That's quite an accomplishment and you should be proud. Quite a risky call.
Like I said during the entire process, there are usually two different types of ways that people handle tough situation. Handle it like a man, or handle it like a *****, as you obviously did and continue to do 3 years later.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#350
#350
VOLorNuttin said:
You mean come back and listen to an idiot (like you) who called those of us who weren't happy about either Kiffin's hiring or Dooley's (neither had a winning resume to commend them to the position), NegaVols?

You were, and continue to be on the losing end of the argument, and yet you still come back here to the scene of the crime, to talk more sh!ite? :loco:
Click to expand...

How can I be on the losing end of an argument you won't have?

Description of Ad Hominem

Translated from Latin to English, "Ad Hominem" means "against the man" or "against the person."

An Ad Hominem is a general category of fallacies in which a claim or argument is rejected on the basis of some irrelevant fact about the author of or the person presenting the claim or argument. Typically, this fallacy involves two steps. First, an attack against the character of person making the claim, her circumstances, or her actions is made (or the character, circumstances, or actions of the person reporting the claim). Second, this attack is taken to be evidence against the claim or argument the person in question is making (or presenting). This type of "argument" has the following form:

Person A makes claim X.
Person B makes an attack on person A.
Therefore A's claim is false.
The reason why an Ad Hominem (of any kind) is a fallacy is that the character, circumstances, or actions of a person do not (in most cases) have a bearing on the truth or falsity of the claim being made (or the quality of the argument being made).
 
Last edited:
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top