the qb questions will continue...

[KaneisAble]

Originally Posted by Cock Kool-Aid

So much butthurt. Shaw is faster, Dylan is a better downfield passer. It's not that complicated.

One would think it wouldn't be. Just be prepared, is all I'm saying. You're now a "player-basher".

[cofcgamecock9]

Originally Posted by KaneisAble

COFC: He is making a list TO STATE WHY SHAW IS BETTER THAN THOMPSON. Everything that follows would then, presumably, be traits that Shaw possesses that Thompson does not (or not to the overwhelming degree that Shaw does). As to the specific point, He says that he is "much, much, MUCH more athletic".

I'm sorry that my use of descriptive language upsets you, but how him stating that and me saying that Shaw has "glaring flaws" that are "hindering the offensive efficiency of the team" is bashing because I used adjectives to discuss his gameplay then we have very different comprehension of what Snoop is doing here (and what he's shown a tremendous tendency towards in the past).

Saying Clowney is more athletic than Taylor isn't bashing Taylor. AND NEITHER IS SAYING THAT SHAW HAS DEMONSTRATED HABITS THAT HAVE BEEN A HINDRANCE TO OFFENSIVE EFFICIENCY. My point is that if what you think I'm doing is bashing, what snoop is doing is the exact same thing. And since your supposed only interest is defending the players, you should take him to task to the degree you've taken me.

It isn't the same thing and I am sorry that you can't see that. Like I said, when I see posts doing what I feeling you are doing to Shaw then I will defend DT. I already said that I think snoop's post after the Clemson game was ridiculous in my opinion and I do think it was bashing. Not sure what else you would want me to say.

Saying that Shaw is more athletic is NOT the same thing because it isn't putting down the play of DT. It is saying something POSITIVE about the play of Shaw. I know you don't seem to be able to see it, but there is a big difference. I am sure Andrew Luck was "much, much more" or many things than the backup at Stanford. But I would have thought it was uncalled for for a poster to talk about the backups "glaring flaws that hurt the team." That is my opinion and it will not change. I don't have a problem with you thinking DT is better. I just don't understand why you didn't stick to being positive about DT and felt the need to, instead, talk about all of the things that Connor does wrong that hurt the team. Again, ESPECIALLY after the performance they gave yesterday.

I really am sorry that you can't see the difference.

[COCKYTALKIN]

Originally Posted by snoopcockycock

excellent post. i agree absolutely 100%!!!

cockytalkin and a few others are trying to make something out of nothing. when he wrote to you that he took issue with my saying thompson played badly in the op, he is stretching the truth like he has done with so many of his posts. here is my opening quote:

"i thought both qb's played very well at times, and both played poorly at times. so, of course, the debate will go on all off-season. lol. well, at least we will have something to talk about. both qb's had two td's, and both had good completion percentages. a win is a win, and i am happy to get it.
no matter what, you can't take anything away from shaw for driving the team down the field at clutch time, and you can't take anything away from thompson for finishing it off when shaw was hurt. great win!"

so, mr. player basher, who actually did write derogatory things about shaw's play, is not only a truth stretcher, but also a hypocrite.

I wasn't referring the OP in this thread snoop. I was referring to bashing you dished out about the Clemson game. Simply trying to get cofc up to speed. He was clearly confused about the genesis of the argument. This whole discussion was born from defending Dylan Thompson against you and gripit.

I think everyone will agree, except for you, that Dylan Thompson softened your tone after the Michigan game. Now the object is for you to own up to slighting Dylan Thompson in the OP of this thread. Crediting him with a "few bad plays" is crap. And you are redefining ridiculousness with your criticism of the game winning touchdown.

[cofcgamecock9]

Originally Posted by KaneisAble

One would think it wouldn't be. Just be prepared, is all I'm saying. You're now a "player-basher".

It is really unfortunate that you can't see the difference in what you are doing. Cock Kool aid didn't say "Dylan is a slow as molasses and really hurts the team anytime he tries to run and it costs us dearly at times." He said Shaw is faster. He also didn't say that "Shaw throws a wobbly ball and is a horrible downfield passer that costs us dearly in games." He said DT is a better downfield passer.

I really do think it is unfortunate that you can't see the difference in how you go out of your way to talk about how Shaw hurts the team while others, at least that I have seen IN THIS THREAD, talk about the positives that one brings to the table in their opinion.

Also, I want to go back and put things in a very important context as far as my posts are concerned. It is VERY important to note that alot of my defensiveness is because I think it was completely out of line for you to make the comments you made about Shaw after the game he had yesterday. The timing has a lot to do with my defending of Shaw from your posts. Shaw and DT had both just produced one of the gutsiest performances we have ever seen by two Gamecocks. They BOTH lead us to victory and they both received game balls. I thought, and still think, that your timing of making sure everyone knew that you think Shaw has "glaring flaws that cost the team dearly" was very poor.

Does Shaw have things he needs to work on? Absolutely. But I certainly don't think yesterday was the day to point those out. The dude balled out yesterday just as did Dylan Thompson.

[KaneisAble]

Originally Posted by cofcgamecock9

It isn't the same thing and I am sorry that you can't see that. Like I said, when I see posts doing what I feeling you are doing to Shaw then I will defend DT. I already said that I think snoop's post after the Clemson game was ridiculous in my opinion and I do think it was bashing. Not sure what else you would want me to say.

Saying that Shaw is more athletic is NOT the same thing because it isn't putting down the play of DT. It is saying something POSITIVE about the play of Shaw. I know you don't seem to be able to see it, but there is a big difference. I am sure Andrew Luck was "much, much more" or many things than the backup at Stanford. But I would have thought it was uncalled for for a poster to talk about the backups "glaring flaws that hurt the team." That is my opinion and it will not change. I don't have a problem with you thinking DT is better. I just don't understand why you didn't stick to being positive about DT and felt the need to, instead, talk about all of the things that Connor does wrong that hurt the team. Again, ESPECIALLY after the performance they gave yesterday.

I really am sorry that you can't see the difference.

So now your problem is my "lack of positivity"? Got it. Again: I made my post in a thread entitled "the qb questions will continue..." and was discussing the gameplay of one of the qbs in question. If I had posted it in your "CONNOR SHAW APPRECIATION THREAD" you may have a point (which you've changed, innumerable times). But if you have a problem w/ anything I said then you should be taking Snoop to task for his "Thompson made bad plays" in the game and "Shaw is better because he is MUCH MUCH MUCH more athletic than Thompson". If you can't see that they're the same then you're not actually interested in the waterfall of positivity and hugs and kisses for all that you purport to be.

[KaneisAble]

Originally Posted by cofcgamecock9

It is really unfortunate that you can't see the difference in what you are doing. Cock Kool aid didn't say "Dylan is a slow as molasses and really hurts the team anytime he tries to run and it costs us dearly at times." He said Shaw is faster. He also didn't say that "Shaw throws a wobbly ball and is a horrible downfield passer that costs us dearly in games." He said DT is a better downfield passer.

I really do think it is unfortunate that you can't see the difference in how you go out of your way to talk about how Shaw hurts the team while others, at least that I have seen IN THIS THREAD, talk about the positives that one brings to the table in their opinion.

So according to you, random poster on the internet, we should all adhere to a strict code of "focusing on the positives only at all times"? You're the authority on what language is allowed?

I didn't go "out of my way". I POSTED IT IN A THREAD REGARDING QB QUESTIONS. Sorry if my specificity was too much for your delicate sensibilities, but don't accuse me of "bashing" because I'm pointing out things (that Kool-Aid pointed out, in another thread that you're all over) that have concerned me this past season. Kool Aid expressed EXACTLY what I did, but didn't use the same language (in the other thread, in particular) and you want to change your point to be about my "use of language". Seriously; I don't think a football message board is the place for you, friend.

EDIT: never said that Shaw was "a horrible downfield passer". If you're going to flame me at least make it things I actually said. I did point out that he underthrew several balls and his tendency to hold on to the ball and look to run hurt us w/ offensive efficiency. So at least quote me accurately if you're going to try so desperately to mus-characterize what I say.

[cofcgamecock9]

Originally Posted by KaneisAble

So according to you, random poster on the internet, we should all adhere to a strict code of "focusing on the positives only at all times"? You're the authority on what language is allowed?

I didn't go "out of my way". I POSTED IT IN A THREAD REGARDING QB QUESTIONS. Sorry if my specificity was too much for your delicate sensibilities, but don't accuse me of "bashing" because I'm pointing out things (that Kool-Aid pointed out, in another thread that you're all over) that have concerned me this past season. Kool Aid expressed EXACTLY what I did, but didn't use the same language (in the other thread, in particular) and you want to change your point to be about my "use of language". Seriously; I don't think a football message board is the place for you, friend.

EDIT: never said that Shaw was "a horrible downfield passer". If you're going to flame me at least make it things I actually said. I did point out that he underthrew several balls and his tendency to hold on to the ball and look to run hurt us w/ offensive efficiency. So at least quote me accurately if you're going to try so desperately to mus-characterize what I say.

I didn't say you said that. I was using an example of what cock cool aid didn't say. I never attributed those to you.

I think there is a big difference in what you are doing and what others are doing. It is my opinion and I am pointing it out. I think your timing was very poor given the game that they played yesterday and so I pointed it out. I have a right to my opinion just as much as you are defending yours.

I haven't seen anyone "bashing" DT the way you have bashed Connor. If I did, I would defend him. I said that I thought snoop's post after the Clemson game regarding Dylan was ridiculous and I feel it was as unwarranted as yours have been.

Now I am done!!!! You continue to bash our players if you want to. I have given my opinion that I think the timing was very poor for you to do that after the performance that they both gave yesterday and that opinion will not change.

But I am done arguing with someone who wants to put down our players when they both gave performances that are two of the best in Gamecocks history.

[snoopcockycock]

Originally Posted by KaneisAble

You crapped all over DT after the Clemson game and you're doing it now, despite "both played good". Look at your little list. It's nothing but bashing DT by stating "he's not nearly as athletic", etc. And I'm the hypocrite. Side note: are you sure you know what "hypocrite" means?)

i will admit that maybe i was a little overzealous in my post after watching the clempscum game. but i was so excited about all of the posts on here proclaiming that thompson played like a greek god. so after that huge build up, and my expectations through the roof, that once i started watching it i was extremely disappointed, and reacting to those posters glorifying him. it was admittedly and emotional post, and while i agree that i was overzealous in it, i still stand by the overall view point. and a big part of my emotions in that post was all the bashing of shaw that i read in the weeks before being able to see the actual game. it pissed me off that our own fans could bash a qb who is our historical leading qb, and played hurt all season long. the disrespect was overwhelming.
and for the record, i have NOT softened in my stance, because i still have the same feelings about dylan's performance in that clempscum game. but i saw some of the highlights of the bowl game, and thought he played very well in this game, and so gave him credit for it.

and by the way, i was not referencing you in the beavis and butthead comment. i made that to cockholio, as he has them in his sig or avatar, and he made, what i thought was a crazy statement. so get your facts straight.

[KaneisAble]

Originally Posted by snoopcockycock

i will admit that maybe i was a little overzealous in my post after watching the clempscum game. but i was so excited about all of the posts on here proclaiming that thompson played like a greek god. so after that huge build up, and my expectations through the roof, that once i started watching it i was extremely disappointed, and reacting to those posters glorifying him. it was admittedly and emotional post, and while i agree that i was overzealous in it, i still stand by the overall view point. and a big part of my emotions in that post was all the bashing of shaw that i read in the weeks before being able to see the actual game. it pissed me off that our own fans could bash a qb who is our historical leading qb, and played hurt all season long. the disrespect was overwhelming.
and for the record, i have NOT softened in my stance, because i still have the same feelings about dylan's performance in that clempscum game. but i saw some of the highlights of the bowl game, and thought he played very well in this game, and so gave him credit for it.

and by the way, i was not referencing you in the beavis and butthead comment. i made that to cockholio, as he has them at his sig or avatar, and he made, what i thought was a crazy statement. so get your facts straight.

So you were " overzealous" but you "still have the same feelings about DT's performance"? Still waiting on what plays Dylan made that were bad in Outback Bowl. interesting that it seems now you may not have even seen the actual game but only the highlights.

I know you weren't referencing me. I was merely pointing out other comments you made.

[snoopcockycock]

Originally Posted by COCKYTALKIN

I wasn't referring the OP in this thread snoop. I was referring to bashing you dished out about the Clemson game. Simply trying to get cofc up to speed. He was clearly confused about the genesis of the argument. This whole discussion was born from defending Dylan Thompson against you and gripit.

I think everyone will agree, except for you, that Dylan Thompson softened your tone after the Michigan game. Now the object is for you to own up to slighting Dylan Thompson in the OP of this thread. Crediting him with a "few bad plays" is crap. And you are redefining ridiculousness with your criticism of the game winning touchdown.

first, i have already stated that i call it like i see it. in the cu game, i didn’t think he played nearly as well as those who made him out to be the second coming. but in the mich game, he played very well and i said as much. keep in mind that even in that other thread, i said several times that i like dylan, and think he is a good qb. but i didn't get the overwhelming praise everyone heaped on that game.

also, i admitted that I was overzealous in my op of the clempscum game, but listed the reasons that it was such an emotional post. However, I slighted no one in the op of this thread. Unless you think Thompson was perfect in his game, and that would answer that question. Second, my original mention of the game winning pass, was to refute either your’s or able’s post about connor’s passes being short and the wr having to wait on it. I have no ill feelings about dylan’s throw on that winning throw, and was thrilled when it happened. But will continue to use it as an example if people keep posting that connor had wobbly short passes, that wr’s had to wait on.
Finally, for all the referencing of “slobbering” over a player, it seems to me that you guys are the ones slobbering all over Thompson, more so than we ever have over shaw. first, Thompson is a backup qb, so for alllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll the praise and ridiculous proclamations that have been poured on him, this could really be labeled as slobbering. but for those who have DEFENDED shaw, that should not be looked at as slobbering. after all, he has the best career record for a qb in usc history. His stats stand up to almost anyone’s in the league. And he did it all season long with a fractured scapula, not to mention the foot and ankle injuries. So there is a difference there.

And I agree with cofc, that if everyone was dumping on Thompson, I would have jumped to his defense just as quickly as I did shaw. go back and look at my post’s last year when those posters started bashing garcia, and thought shaw was the greek god. I defended garcia. Even though garcia continuously pissed me off week in and week out, I still defended him, because I thought it was unfair that posters were bashing our starting qb.

[snoopcockycock]

Originally Posted by KaneisAble

So you were " overzealous" but you "still have the same feelings about DT's performance"? Still waiting on what plays Dylan made that were bad in Outback Bowl. interesting that it seems now you may not have even seen the actual game but only the highlights.

I know you weren't referencing me. I was merely pointing out other comments you made.

yes, there is a difference in what my opinion is, and how i present it. do you get it now? and why are you still waiting on it. have you read this thread? i answered it immediately. he shouldn't have taken the sack, and a couple of this throws. the same as connor holding onto the ball too long on some plays, and a couple of his throws. i said "BOTH" from the op, and i stick with that. lastly, it is no great discovery that i didn't see the game. if you have followed these threads, it was well documented that i don't see games live. are you following?

[KaneisAble]

Originally Posted by snoopcockycock

yes, there is a difference in what my opinion is, and how i present it. do you get it now? and why are you still waiting on it. have you read this thread? i answered it immediately. he shouldn't have taken the sack, and a couple of this throws. the same as connor holding onto the ball too long on some plays, and a couple of his throws. i said "BOTH" from the op, and i stick with that. lastly, it is no great discovery that i didn't see the game. if you have followed these threads, it was well documented that i don't see games live. are you following?

I highlighted all of the flaming just for posterity's sake.

As far as you "not seeing the game", I know you didn't see the Clemson game live; you then intimated (pages into the thread) that "from the highlights" Thompson had "bad plays". But you never flat out said you didn't see the actual game live. What I'm waiting on is for you to back up the "bad plays" of Thompson. Because other than the sack and the game winning TD I haven't seen anything to actually support the assertion that Thompson, like Shaw, had "bad plays".

But again, you didn't actually see the game so I'll put the requisite stock in your opining.

[COCKYTALKIN]

Originally Posted by snoopcockycock

first, i have already stated that i call it like i see it. in the cu game, i didn’t think he played nearly as well as those who made him out to be the second coming. but in the mich game, he played very well and i said as much. keep in mind that even in that other thread, i said several times that i like dylan, and think he is a good qb. but i didn't get the overwhelming praise everyone heaped on that game.

also, i admitted that I was overzealous in my op of the clempscum game, but listed the reasons that it was such an emotional post. However, I slighted no one in the op of this thread. Unless you think Thompson was perfect in his game, and that would answer that question. Second, my original mention of the game winning pass, was to refute either your’s or able’s post about connor’s passes being short and the wr having to wait on it. I have no ill feelings about dylan’s throw on that winning throw, and was thrilled when it happened. But will continue to use it as an example if people keep posting that connor had wobbly short passes, that wr’s had to wait on.
Finally, for all the referencing of “slobbering” over a player, it seems to me that you guys are the ones slobbering all over Thompson, more so than we ever have over shaw. first, Thompson is a backup qb, so for alllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll the praise and ridiculous proclamations that have been poured on him, this could really be labeled as slobbering. but for those who have DEFENDED shaw, that should not be looked at as slobbering. after all, he has the best career record for a qb in usc history. His stats stand up to almost anyone’s in the league. And he did it all season long with a fractured scapula, not to mention the foot and ankle injuries. So there is a difference there.

And I agree with cofc, that if everyone was dumping on Thompson, I would have jumped to his defense just as quickly as I did shaw. go back and look at my post’s last year when those posters started bashing garcia, and thought shaw was the greek god. I defended garcia. Even though garcia continuously pissed me off week in and week out, I still defended him, because I thought it was unfair that posters were bashing our starting qb.

I'll have to admit I am clearly wrong about the Michigan game softening your stance in light of the fact that you haven't seen the game. We'll talk later when you actually see the sack and the passes you have issue with.

[KaneisAble]

Originally Posted by COCKYTALKIN

I'll have to admit I am clearly wrong about the Michigan game softening your stance in light of the fact that you haven't seen the game. We'll talk later when you actually see the sack and the passes you have issue with.

Yeah, I'm actually upset that he would even suggest Connor had "bad plays" considering he hasn't seen the game.

[Regalcock]

Originally Posted by Flameout12

And Pantera got banned.

for what?

Originally Posted by snoopcockycock

i will admit that maybe i was a little overzealous in my post after watching the clempscum game. but i was so excited about all of the posts on here proclaiming that thompson played like a greek god. so after that huge build up, and my expectations through the roof, that once i started watching it i was extremely disappointed, and reacting to those posters glorifying him. it was admittedly and emotional post, and while i agree that i was overzealous in it, i still stand by the overall view point. and a big part of my emotions in that post was all the bashing of shaw that i read in the weeks before being able to see the actual game. it pissed me off that our own fans could bash a qb who is our historical leading qb, and played hurt all season long. the disrespect was overwhelming.
and for the record, i have NOT softened in my stance, because i still have the same feelings about dylan's performance in that clempscum game. but i saw some of the highlights of the bowl game, and thought he played very well in this game, and so gave him credit for it.

and by the way, i was not referencing you in the beavis and butthead comment. i made that to cockholio, as he has them in his sig or avatar, and he made, what i thought was a crazy statement. so get your facts straight.

Snoop this was some of your thoughts from the Clemson game below

all those saying dylan has the stronger arm, you're crazy!!!! he should have been intercepted on the throw to byrd, one hops almost all of the out routes, takes sacks with little mobility, and when he does run, he doesn't look even a third as good as connor does. he has shorted the ball to ellington and ace several times, and flat missed a wide open ace behind coverage in the endzone, and should have been intercepted on that one as well. whew! i just had to get that off of my chest. i've been watching this thing wondering what all the hoopla has been about, because i just don't see it.
and yes, i understand i haven't watched the second half yet, but i don't care if he looked like a heisman qb in the second, he looks terrible against a terrible defense in the first. i think he is a decent backup, but after seeing this with my own eyes, i think a lot of you guys owe conner shaw a HUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUGGGGGEEEEEEEEEEEE E
apology!!!!!!!"

Now I really want to know if you think Connor has the stronger arm of the two. Which was my only argument in the aforementioned thread...that Dylan has a stronger arm or at least generates more velocity with his wrist snap.

[KaneisAble]

Originally Posted by Regalcock

for what?




Snoop this was some of your thoughts from the Clemson game below

all those saying dylan has the stronger arm, you're crazy!!!! he should have been intercepted on the throw to byrd, one hops almost all of the out routes, takes sacks with little mobility, and when he does run, he doesn't look even a third as good as connor does. he has shorted the ball to ellington and ace several times, and flat missed a wide open ace behind coverage in the endzone, and should have been intercepted on that one as well. whew! i just had to get that off of my chest. i've been watching this thing wondering what all the hoopla has been about, because i just don't see it.
and yes, i understand i haven't watched the second half yet, but i don't care if he looked like a heisman qb in the second, he looks terrible against a terrible defense in the first. i think he is a decent backup, but after seeing this with my own eyes, i think a lot of you guys owe conner shaw a HUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUGGGGGEEEEEEEEEEEE E
apology!!!!!!!"

Now I really want to know if you think Connor has the stronger arm of the two. Which was my only argument in the aforementioned thread...that Dylan has a stronger arm or at least generates more velocity with his wrist snap.

Good God.

[COCKYTALKIN]

Just when I started think somebody had turned out the lights.

[me4USC]

Originally Posted by cofcgamecock9

Please show me where I have bashed DT in any way.

This is the thread that just won't die. Where are the mods?

[TheUSCMike]

Originally Posted by me4USC

This is the thread that just won't die. Where are the mods?

points

[snoopcockycock]

Originally Posted by COCKYTALKIN

Just when I started think somebody had turned out the lights.

ct, after reading your last few posts, it is confirmed that your light has been out for a while.
and that is all i have to say about your and ca's idiot mission to prove i bashed dt in the op.

Originally Posted by Regalcock

Snoop this was some of your thoughts from the Clemson game below

all those saying dylan has the stronger arm, you're crazy!!!! he should have been intercepted on the throw to byrd, one hops almost all of the out routes, takes sacks with little mobility, and when he does run, he doesn't look even a third as good as connor does. he has shorted the ball to ellington and ace several times, and flat missed a wide open ace behind coverage in the endzone, and should have been intercepted on that one as well. whew! i just had to get that off of my chest. i've been watching this thing wondering what all the hoopla has been about, because i just don't see it.
and yes, i understand i haven't watched the second half yet, but i don't care if he looked like a heisman qb in the second, he looks terrible against a terrible defense in the first. i think he is a decent backup, but after seeing this with my own eyes, i think a lot of you guys owe conner shaw a HUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUGGGGGEEEEEEEEEEEE E
apology!!!!!!!"

Now I really want to know if you think Connor has the stronger arm of the two. Which was my only argument in the aforementioned thread...that Dylan has a stronger arm or at least generates more velocity with his wrist snap.

regal i was in no way trying to denegrate dylan's ability to throw the ball. my point of emphasis was aimed toward all of the guys who tried to use connor having a weak arm to make their points for dylan. however, after the build up of how great dylan played against cu, when i actually saw it, i truly was astonished at some of the posts i had read. that is why i reacted so harshly. but it is what it is. i stand by the points of what i wrote, but think i could have presented it a little less emotionally.
to answer your question, i don't ever remember claiming connor actually had the stronger arm. i did question dylan having the stronger arm, but don't remember ever stating that connor had the stronger arm. if i did, i'd like to see that quote. i did say he didn't run nearly as good as shaw. but what i have said many, many times, is that connor DOES HAVE A STRONG ARM. i seriously don't know if it is stronger, as strong or not quite as strong as dylan's. however, i would say that it is every bit as strong based on the fact that he threw the ball sixty yards on that first td play. the line of scrimmage might have been 56 yards, but he was well behind that line when he let it fly. and that ball was way up in the air as well. now, for him to be able to do that with a fractured scapula is nothing short of spectacular. so i might not say that he has a stronger arm, but i do believe he has a very strong arm, and his over all package as a qb is better. since sos starts him, i don't see how anyone disagree's with this.