Furman at UTC Negative Nancy Game Thread

[FUBeAR]

FUBeAR is extremely NEGATIVE that this video is out there on the InterWebs CLAIMING that 6-1 / .875 UTC is in 1st place in the SoCon over our 5-0 / 1.000 Paladins … something their beat writer is also claiming across multiple platforms (see X / Tweet below). Well, he’s actually calling it “tied,” but his spreading of misinformation has led to this BIG LIE proliferating nationally across the entire landscape of College Football…as we see here.

Why has our University, Athletic Department, and Football Program failed to have filed lawsuits against all the parties making these libelous statements and not demanded an immediate injunction prohibiting the further spread of this dangerous claim. They are simply asleep at the wheel and MUST DO BETTER!!!

[FUTex]

FUBear has exposed the BIG LIE! I too am angry. "How dare you" I say in my best Greta Thunberg.

I am indeed consulting a good attorney. But first I'm consulting a board certified physician. To treat my apoplexy.

Next thing you know they'll be claiming that the championship, 2nd place, and so on are not discreet placements. Rather they exist on a continuum. I, for one, will not submit to the mob. This is the trench I am willing to die in.

The Paladins have to win this Saturday to stop UTC's venality and misdirections before they infect the rest of the nation.

 

[Bootie]

Gf you often use an argument that the radio guy said this or the TV guy said this to support a point. Many of the people you discuss with here in this forum have spent more time on the field than me and you combined. Hell I was on sports talk radio for a couple years and I’m just as dumb as the average armchair quarterback. Being on the radio just means you’re pretty good at talking and pressing buttons, and not good-looking enough for TV ha ha. It doesn’t mean your opinions are necessarily any more qualified than anyone else’s.

[Bootie]

DPLOT

To clarify, my comments were not meant to disparage our wonderful radio crew but simply to point out that the opinions of those former players should not be elevated over those of other former players, just because one group speaks theirs into a microphone and another group type theirs with a keyboard. They are opinions. Neither is right neither is wrong.

[FUBeAR]

FUBear has exposed the BIG LIE! I too am angry. "How dare you" I say in my best Greta Thunberg.

I am indeed consulting a good attorney. But first I'm consulting a board certified physician. To treat my apoplexy.

Next thing you know they'll be claiming that the championship, 2nd place, and so on are not discreet placements. Rather they exist on a continuum. I, for one, will not submit to the mob. This is the trench I am willing to die in.

The Paladins have to win this Saturday to stop UTC's venality and misdirections before they infect the rest of the nation.

Before today, it was only prevaricating media types and giggly YouTube content creators…but now it’s from an Official State Source.

https://gomocs.com/news/2023/10/31/foo ... -week.aspx

The standings have the Paladins and Mocs in a virtual tie for first…

The University of Tennessee at Chattanooga is part of the State Government of one of the 50 States of the U-Nited States of America.

So, now, we have let this become the Official Policy Position of the United States of America that Chattanooga is tied with Furman for 1st place in the Southern Conference Football standings.

This is an outrage! It’s a conspiratorial crime of the highest order!! Where are Matt Cavanaugh and Rona Coney Barrett?? They should be out in front of this along with President Davis, VP/AD Donnelly, and Coach Hendrix.

COMPLETE FAILURE AND ABROGATION OF THEIR DUTIES TO US AS ALUMNI AND FANS!!!!

[gofurman]

DPLOT

To clarify, my comments were not meant to disparage our wonderful radio crew but simply to point out that the opinions of those former players should not be elevated over those of other former players, just because one group speaks theirs into a microphone and another group type theirs with a keyboard. They are opinions. Neither is right neither is wrong.

This sounds a little too politically correct ...

That said, I agree with that just because someone played football doesn't always mean they know more than someone who has not. I recall someone who played for us arguing vehemently (this is a few years ago) that just because we gave up 7 sacks in one game and then 5 sacks in the next - as a running team !! - doesn't mean the OL and overall blocking has a problem. I mean, CMON. unless the QB was holding the ball for 7 seconds (he wasn't) there is a blocking problem when you give up 7 sacks. Example? Furman vs Samford - 9 sacks. Samford has an OL blocking problem. And Furman made them pay !!!!!!!!!

[Stumpy]

DPLOT

To clarify, my comments were not meant to disparage our wonderful radio crew but simply to point out that the opinions of those former players should not be elevated over those of other former players, just because one group speaks theirs into a microphone and another group type theirs with a keyboard. They are opinions. Neither is right neither is wrong.

Can I disparage Cobb just a little bit? This IS the Negative Nancy thread after all.

I had a FB memory pop up yesterday that reminded me of the time that Dan had the best call ever. It was directed at Cobb and it went like this:

"It was a six-yard punt and you're complaining about the spot?"

[FUBeAR]

DPLOT

To clarify, my comments were not meant to disparage our wonderful radio crew but simply to point out that the opinions of those former players should not be elevated over those of other former players, just because one group speaks theirs into a microphone and another group type theirs with a keyboard. They are opinions. Neither is right neither is wrong.

This sounds a little too politically correct ...

That said, I agree with that just because someone played football doesn't always mean they know more than someone who has not. I recall someone who played for us arguing vehemently (this is a few years ago) that just because we gave up 7 sacks in one game and then 5 sacks in the next - as a running team !! - doesn't mean the OL and overall blocking has a problem. I mean, CMON. unless the QB was holding the ball for 7 seconds (he wasn't) there is a blocking problem when you give up 7 sacks. Example? Furman vs Samford - 9 sacks. Samford has an OL blocking problem. And Furman made them pay !!!!!!!!!

You know TE’s and RB’s are not “OL” - right?

And you know TE’s and RB’s often have PassPro responsibilities - right?

And you may know that RB’s OFTEN have KEY responsibilities for blitz pickup in PassPro - right?

And you may know TE’s in Max Protect schemes often have PassPro responsibilities for a Defense’s best Edge Rusher - right?

And you probably know that most sacks include some type of blitzing action by the Defense and/or are made by the Defense’s best Edge Rusher - right?

Assuming you answered “Yes” to every “right?” question above, then you can certainly conclude and acknowledge that it is quite possible that an Offense may give up a sack or multiple sacks in a game without an “OL” ever missing even a single PassPro assignment - right?

Just in case you fell off of a branch somewhere along this logic tree …

It is possible and it does happen more frequently than most casual Football fans realize…obviously.

[gofurman]

Gf you often use an argument that the radio guy said this or the TV guy said this to support a point. Many of the people you discuss with here in this forum have spent more time on the field than me and you combined. Hell I was on sports talk radio for a couple years and I’m just as dumb as the average armchair quarterback. Being on the radio just means you’re pretty good at talking and pressing buttons, and not good-looking enough for TV ha ha. It doesn’t mean your opinions are necessarily any more qualified than anyone else’s.

Bootie, first good to hear from you!

However, The first two sentences are at odds.

The first one you are saying just because a guy on TV (TROY AIKMAN, TONY ROMO, etc.) doesn't mean he knows anything. Eh, I would say Aikman and Romo know something. I am talking about elite level players. Like when Peyton Manning says you shouldn't throw short of the sticks on 3rd down!!! That counts for something. These aren't fanboy podcasts. These are NFL QBs or NFL players.. I don't mean Erin Andrews. Though I can appreciate her being on the sideline

Then in your second sentence you flat-out reverse course and state that people on this board have spent a lot of time on the field?? Per your first sentence this "time on the field" is not worth junk anyway... I mean the people I am talking about (not talking heads but people like Cole Neely for us at Center, Aikman, Romo etc) should know something.

I am confused. Should we not respect our players like Cole Neely or Marcus Morris? Mainly, I am confused as in one sentence you say radio / TV guys (NFL GUYS) aren't worth much to support my point and in the next sentence you point out that time on the field counts for something ???

Please explain. No offense. Maybe I don't understand. I probably don't. LOL

[gofurman]

DPLOT

To clarify, my comments were not meant to disparage our wonderful radio crew but simply to point out that the opinions of those former players should not be elevated over those of other former players, just because one group speaks theirs into a microphone and another group type theirs with a keyboard. They are opinions. Neither is right neither is wrong.

This sounds a little too politically correct ...

That said, I agree with that just because someone played football doesn't always mean they know more than someone who has not. I recall someone who played for us arguing vehemently (this is a few years ago) that just because we gave up 7 sacks in one game and then 5 sacks in the next - as a running team !! - doesn't mean the OL and overall blocking has a problem. I mean, CMON. unless the QB was holding the ball for 7 seconds (he wasn't) there is a blocking problem when you give up 7 sacks. Example? Furman vs Samford - 9 sacks. Samford has an OL blocking problem. And Furman made them pay !!!!!!!!!

You know TE’s and RB’s are not “OL” - right?

And you know TE’s and RB’s often have PassPro responsibilities - right?

And you may know that RB’s OFTEN have KEY responsibilities for blitz pickup in PassPro - right?

And you probably know that most sacks include some type of blitzing action by the Defense - right?

Assuming you answered “Yes” to every “right?” question above, then you can certainly conclude and acknowledge that it is quite possible that an Offense may give up a sack or multiple sacks in a game without an “OL” ever missing even a single PassPro assignment - right?

Just in case you fell off of a branch somewhere along this logic tree …

It is possible and it does happen more frequently than most casual Football fans realize…obviously.

Yes, I just didn't want to go down that rabbit hole. In the game I recall It was under Fowler and some weird OL scheme (FULLY ADMITTED by some of his biggest fans on here) was allowing penetration at the OL.

Absolutely, RB and TE are huge keys to protection !!!

I also think OL is a SKILL Position

[FUBeAR]

DPLOT

To clarify, my comments were not meant to disparage our wonderful radio crew but simply to point out that the opinions of those former players should not be elevated over those of other former players, just because one group speaks theirs into a microphone and another group type theirs with a keyboard. They are opinions. Neither is right neither is wrong.

This sounds a little too politically correct ...

That said, I agree with that just because someone played football doesn't always mean they know more than someone who has not. I recall someone who played for us arguing vehemently (this is a few years ago) that just because we gave up 7 sacks in one game and then 5 sacks in the next - as a running team !! - doesn't mean the OL and overall blocking has a problem. I mean, CMON. unless the QB was holding the ball for 7 seconds (he wasn't) there is a blocking problem when you give up 7 sacks. Example? Furman vs Samford - 9 sacks. Samford has an OL blocking problem. And Furman made them pay !!!!!!!!!

You know TE’s and RB’s are not “OL” - right?

And you know TE’s and RB’s often have PassPro responsibilities - right?

And you may know that RB’s OFTEN have KEY responsibilities for blitz pickup in PassPro - right?

And you probably know that most sacks include some type of blitzing action by the Defense - right?

Assuming you answered “Yes” to every “right?” question above, then you can certainly conclude and acknowledge that it is quite possible that an Offense may give up a sack or multiple sacks in a game without an “OL” ever missing even a single PassPro assignment - right?

Just in case you fell off of a branch somewhere along this logic tree …

It is possible and it does happen more frequently than most casual Football fans realize…obviously.

Yes, I just didn't want to go down that rabbit hole. In the game I recall It was under Fowler and some weird OL scheme (FULLY ADMITTED by some of his biggest fans on here) was allowing penetration at the OL.

Absolutely, RB and TE are huge keys to protection !!!

Not a “rabbit hole”

It is a major frustration for people who know Football (particularly Offensive Football) when watching Football or discussing Football on message boards with casual fans, to listen to or read the casual fans constantly beseeching the Offensive Line, specifically, to “BLOCK SOMEONE!!!” and/or denigrating the performance of the Offensive Line (because that’s what they’ve learned to do from other casual fans) when the primary problem may lie with the blocking schemes themselves, the formations from which the plays are being run, the ball carrier mis-performing, and/or the non OL blockers failing in their assignments.

Sometimes OLines and OLinemen suck

ALL times casual fans blame OLines and OLinemen if Defenders get their jobs done near, at, or behind the line of scrimmage REGARDLESS of the actual performance success of the OLines and OLmen.

[gman84]

I can't remember the coach... He was asked in a post game presser why a certain RB was not on the field more ? His answer was very short, "he's going to get my QB killed." Might have been Mike Tomlin.

[The Jackal]

I can't remember the coach... He was asked in a post game presser why a certain RB was not on the field more ? His answer was very short, "he's going to get my QB killed." Might have been Mike Tomlin.

Other times, it just doesn't matter. This play, for instance, is an everybody problem.

I'm not entirely sure how the RB and the LG both tried to take out Gilby's knees and he still got the sack.

[Bootie]

Gf you often use an argument that the radio guy said this or the TV guy said this to support a point. Many of the people you discuss with here in this forum have spent more time on the field than me and you combined. Hell I was on sports talk radio for a couple years and I’m just as dumb as the average armchair quarterback. Being on the radio just means you’re pretty good at talking and pressing buttons, and not good-looking enough for TV ha ha. It doesn’t mean your opinions are necessarily any more qualified than anyone else’s.

Bootie, first good to hear from you!

However, The first two sentences are at odds.

The first one you are saying just because a guy on TV (TROY AIKMAN, TONY ROMO, etc.) doesn't mean he knows anything. Eh, I would say Aikman and Romo know something. I am talking about elite level players. Like when Peyton Manning says you shouldn't throw short of the sticks on 3rd down!!! That counts for something. These aren't fanboy podcasts. These are NFL QBs or NFL players.. I don't mean Erin Andrews. Though I can appreciate her being on the sideline

Then in your second sentence you flat-out reverse course and state that people on this board have spent a lot of time on the field?? Per your first sentence this "time on the field" is not worth junk anyway... I mean the people I am talking about (not talking heads but people like Cole Neely for us at Center, Aikman, Romo etc) should know something.

I am confused. Should we not respect our players like Cole Neely or Marcus Morris? Mainly, I am confused as in one sentence you say radio / TV guys (NFL GUYS) aren't worth much to support my point and in the next sentence you point out that time on the field counts for something ???

Please explain. No offense. Maybe I don't understand. I probably don't. LOL

The conflict is only because you seek to argue about anything

The first sentence explains that just because a person is on the radio or TV (with or without a sports background) it doesn't mean their opinion should be elevated above any other person (with or without a sports background) who is not on the radio or TV. The second sentence explains that those people with sports experience have, IMO, at least a little more knowledge and credibility than those who do not (me, you, armchair fans, etc...).

I explained that in the follow up post, but you wanted to find something to argue about with that one too.

I anxiously await the argument this one will generate.

[gofurman]

Gf you often use an argument that the radio guy said this or the TV guy said this to support a point. Many of the people you discuss with here in this forum have spent more time on the field than me and you combined. Hell I was on sports talk radio for a couple years and I’m just as dumb as the average armchair quarterback. Being on the radio just means you’re pretty good at talking and pressing buttons, and not good-looking enough for TV ha ha. It doesn’t mean your opinions are necessarily any more qualified than anyone else’s.

Bootie, first good to hear from you!

However, The first two sentences are at odds.

The first one you are saying just because a guy on TV (TROY AIKMAN, TONY ROMO, etc.) doesn't mean he knows anything. Eh, I would say Aikman and Romo know something. I am talking about elite level players. Like when Peyton Manning says you shouldn't throw short of the sticks on 3rd down!!! That counts for something. These aren't fanboy podcasts. These are NFL QBs or NFL players.. I don't mean Erin Andrews. Though I can appreciate her being on the sideline

Then in your second sentence you flat-out reverse course and state that people on this board have spent a lot of time on the field?? Per your first sentence this "time on the field" is not worth junk anyway... I mean the people I am talking about (not talking heads but people like Cole Neely for us at Center, Aikman, Romo etc) should know something.

I am confused. Should we not respect our players like Cole Neely or Marcus Morris? Mainly, I am confused as in one sentence you say radio / TV guys (NFL GUYS) aren't worth much to support my point and in the next sentence you point out that time on the field counts for something ???

Please explain. No offense. Maybe I don't understand. I probably don't. LOL

The conflict is only because you seek to argue about anything

The first sentence explains that just because a person is on the radio or TV (with or without a sports background) it doesn't mean their opinion should be elevated above any other person (with or without a sports background) who is not on the radio or TV. The second sentence explains that those people with sports experience have, IMO, at least a little more knowledge and credibility than those who do not (me, you, armchair fans, etc...).

I explained that in the follow up post, but you wanted to find something to argue about with that one too.

I anxiously await the argument this one will generate.

Bootie, I know you. Personally. Cmon man.

This is Not cool. You are better than this. You are. You are a great guy

This is the kind of reply that says “if you reply you are argumentative”. “If you don’t reply I somehow win”. It’s a no win - let’s both let it go now

I am too old for this. Lol.

As an aside, If you were saying that players don’t ALWAYS know more than casual fans I agree. To wit, I was a computer programmer for 12 years and you or anyone might have an insight that I don’t. I will throw myself under the bus. Sometimes NOT having done something provides a perspective that the “experienced” person doesn’t have. Hell, it took 7 years for them to realize the football was perfectly shaped for a forward pass or something. Rules change by FDR (I think FDR) made the forward pass legal in 1906…. Yet the forward pass didn’t really catch on until roughly 1913. Great example of those too close to something not seeing what was there for the taking. . Heck our own Sam Wyche had to introduce the no huddle. All them super smart football players who had played the game prior had never thought to do this as much as he did. Our own FU Wyche shook up the game!!.

Even the most experienced guy doesn’t see a lot of what is going on and misses a lot of potential. That’s how it is in every sport industry etc

I’m SURE I am missing a ton in my work