This site is supported by the advertisements on it, please disable your AdBlocker so we can continue to provide you with the quality content you expect.
  1. Follow us on Twitter @buckeyeplanet and @bp_recruiting, like us on Facebook! Enjoy a post or article, recommend it to others! BP is only as strong as its community, and we only promote by word of mouth, so share away!
    Dismiss Notice
  2. Consider registering! Fewer and higher quality ads, no emails you don't want, access to all the forums, download game torrents, private messages, polls, Sportsbook, etc. Even if you just want to lurk, there are a lot of good reasons to register!
    Dismiss Notice

I am going to die laughing, it hurts, must stop...

Discussion in 'Buckeye Football' started by Clarity, Nov 22, 2003.

  1. Clarity

    Clarity Will Bryant Staff Member

    Seriously... Ow. Need air.

    You know, I had completely abandoned Bucknuts. But then I just got a call from a Husker buddy of mine that I served with, and he sent me to the post I'm going to quote below. He was rolling, I found myself joining him in relatively short order.

    I hadn't considered the potential for unintentional comedy that Bucknuts represents these days, it is indeed an untapped gold mine. I mean, we just lost to Michigan, and I actually laughed out loud. lol. Sick.

    "THE" post follows. This is not a joke, it's a real post....

    (Edit -- for any that need more 'clarity', I'm going to embolden the areas I find so funny...)

    "Not that it matters but this is the first time I have not supported Coach Tressel. He eliminated our chance of winning the game by putting Krenzel back in the game. What was he thinking?? Krenzel is not even an average college qb yet Tressel put him back in the game after McMullen played well and CK proved he shouldn't be in the game. Tressel is too loyal and it cost his team and our school a chance to repeat.

    I will never support Tressel again as I now know he should not be the coach of our team. His decision was that bad. Last year was a pure act of God. Thank you God. I don't even appreciate that now after our coach played like a loser. Tressel should retire while he is ahead. There must be a coach who plays to win. I want him over Tressel.

    What really makes me sick is that last year was a fluke not a real sign of a great program. We may as well get Cooper back.
    We are a lock to lose our bowl game since Krenzel is going to start. Maybe we will play a weak team since we will be about #15 in the polls.

    Michigan was a better team but Tressel lost this game without giving our tean [sic] a chance. Thanks Jim.

    Go Bucks!"
     
  2. DEBuckeye

    DEBuckeye It ain't easy, bein' cheesy.

    Yeah, I saw that one. Unbelievable. I'll trade today's QB question for 24-2 and the Championship any day!
     
  3. LoKyBuckeye

    LoKyBuckeye I give up. This board is too hard to understand. Staff Member

    I just hope none of these "fans" twist an ankle or spain a knee while jumping off the bandwagon. What a pathetic post. Putting CK back in the game was questionable (IMHO) but to say that last year was a fluke....... come on. 10-2 is not that bad of a record in the Big 10. Yeah the loss hurts...... but that's football.
     
  4. gobucks7

    gobucks7 Newbie

    I thought putting CK back in the game after his injury was stupid (IMO). Even though I am disgusted with that decision I cannot begin to understand how it cost us the game. There were many, many, many things that cost us the game.

    Maybe we were outplayed?
     
  5. Clarity

    Clarity Will Bryant Staff Member

    Outplayed, outcoached perhaps -- all in Ann Arbor packed with more fans than an NCAA game has ever seen. I'm not making excuses, we just plain got beat. That was an honest loss, I feel WAY better about it than I did the Wiscy L. I mean, my personal opinion was that I didn't agree with CK going back in after that sort of injury. He had played extremely well to that point *overall*, but Scottie Mac is more than capable, came in and played well, and I wanted to ride him out. But there's a good reason I'm watching from behind a tv set, instead of from the sideline.

    So, just for the record, I don't have a beef with him hating JT's call, I just find the rest of it hysterical. How far he takes it.

    That sort of attitude is representative of the type of people that have (IMO) destroyed what was the best place to talk OSU football. It used to piss me off, now I just find it hysterical.

    Anyway, we could have folded down 21. Instead, we made it a game, and there were some great shots of Weasel fans on the sideline when we came within 7 -- they thought it was all slipping away. So, we got spanked, and yet we still made it a game. That's JT's upside. Even when you get crushed you can win. He's got his downsides, as does every other coach out there. There's no other HC I'd rather have right now though. I have no real problem with people who don't agree. That's their prerogative, I just find humor in the crazies.
     
  6. Cincinnatibuck

    Cincinnatibuck Freshman

    I was going to go see what was being said on bucknuts but decided to stop by here first, glad I did. If the doctors gave the okay for Krenzel to go back into the game then i don't have a problem with that. It wasn't as if mcmullen was lighting the world on fire. To call last year an act of God and JT cant coach is ridiculous.
     
  7. BuckNutty

    BuckNutty Hear The Drummer Get Wicked Staff Member Bookie

    There is unintentional comedy all over Bucknuts. It's helping to take the edge off.
     
  8. gbearbuck

    gbearbuck Herbie for President

    Maybe this loss will wash all the wagon fans away... C-Dog, as far as I'm concerned, whoever posted that at BN can be added to the list of those not allowed to post here (not that what I think means squat)... what a joke, I hope he leaves the buckeye sites for good!!!!!!
     
  9. ashlandbuck

    ashlandbuck Banned

    You may think the post on Bucknuts is crazy but I agree in that When Craig starts off bad he usually stays bad. He was bad today. Should've hit a streaking wide open Jenkins in the first Quarter that probably would've been six and have immediately answered a scUM score. Should've been a big point in the game.
    He made several throws late, threw behind Childress that allowed the defender to knock it down. I think a lot of posters agreed on this site that Craig will start good and remain good or start bad and remain bad. He was not having a good game and if you add the inury to that I think it would've been better to see if Scott could've done what he had done in his previous relief job. He did a good Job in the two series he played and if not for a Jenkins drop he may have drove them to another score. I don't think the choice to pull Scott cost them the game, there were just too many other factors. But I do believe that Tressell made a bad choice. Don't be too hard on these emotional post.People are passionate and I'd rather have that way than have a lot of people that are "ho hum" about this loss. God, I hate losing to that state up north!!!!!
     
  10. MililaniBuckeye

    MililaniBuckeye The satanic soulless freight train that is Ohio St Staff Member Tech Admin

    I saw that post, too, and ripped him pretty good. "42buck" is the guy's moniker (42 must be his IQ).

    Two words for the guy: F*cking moron.
     
  11. Clarity

    Clarity Will Bryant Staff Member

    ashland --

    Craig started off bad(ly)? Are you serious? Sure, he overthrew some balls, but he was 8 of 9 on our scoring drive, and the one incomplete could have been caught.

    Look at his stats before the injury. He played very well, even if you don't factor in the pressure he faced.

    I think sometimes fans don't see the forest for the trees with Craig. You point out some missed passes, but don't notice the stat line and what he did accomplish.

    I can honestly say that I thought yesterday was one of Craig's better games until he hurt his shoulder.

    Just a difference of opinion though, and I have no real problem with yours, just don't understand it.

    There are a lot of reasons we lost yesterday, I just don't include Craig as one of the more significant ones. Most of our problems were (oddly) defensive related. Very few on offense.
     
  12. ashlandbuck

    ashlandbuck Banned

    Clarity

    I know you are a smart person so I'm sure you've heard the saying that "stats are for losers". It's not the completions he did make or his first quarter stats that win or lose games. It's "key" plays that makes a difference. The miss to Jenkins was huge. The bad throw to Childress was a third down play when the Bucks were on the verge of coming back. Please don't misunderstand me and believe I'm saying that Craig cost us the game. You are absoluetly right that it was the defense that failed This time.
    I just call'em as I see'em and I think Craig could've been better. He didn't hit the ones that could've made a difference.
    I respect your opinion and I think It's something we could argue endlessly. Talk to you later.
     
  13. Clarity

    Clarity Will Bryant Staff Member

    He missed some passes, who doesn't? I've watched a lot of Brett Favre over the years, a QB who I think is one of this eras best. He misses a lot of passes, forces the ball quite often into bad places. But he's a great QB nonetheless.

    My point here is that no QB throws every ball perfectly. Certainly Craig doesn't. He doesn't throw a pretty ball, but he thinks about almost every pass he makes. Scottie Mac throws a nicer ball, but he does a lot less thinking. Sometimes that's good, sometimes it's bad.

    I've never heard "stats are for losers" before. And to be honest, I can't for the life of me figure out why they are. When we talk about "key" plays, I think about the 8 of 9 drive that resulted in a TD. Or another great throw to Santonio that allowed for another TD. Or the throws that were led perfectly to allow the WR to spin up in the right direction. Good throws. To go along with his bad. All in all, I definitely feel Craig was throwing well in that game until he was injured. No question he wasn't the same when he came back afterwards. Perhaps you're right, perhaps "stats are for losers", but the reality is that at least in this case, the stats tell a good story about Craig in the game pre-injury. High completion rate, 2 TDs, no INTs.

    So yes, Craig could have been better. And yes, every single player on the team could have been better. All the Michigan players could have been better too. Everyone can always get better. Yesterday, Michigan played to nearly their best potential and we didn't. There's the big difference.

    Anyway, it's not an argument at all. You've got an opinion, so do I. No big thing. Only thing I can't digest is the 'stats' comment, you might not be on the right site if you don't like stats, because if I have my way, there's going to be a lot of them around here in time.

    I went back through and read all your previous posts, and I stopped for a bit on one (in "never welcome list") where you commented/joked that you were afraid to be negative. You shouldn't be, and clearly you aren't. If you find yourself really wanting to get into convos delving into the faults of individual player's performances, I highly recommend you also check out the forum at http://mb10.theinsiders.com/fohiostatefrm1 -- there are a lot of people over there who take it WAY too far, but not all of them are that way.

    None of that is to even remotely suggest that we only talk positively here, that's not the case at all. But certainly there's a different atmosphere on this board. That's a positive for some people, and not so much for others.

    At the end of the day, I feel like whether or not Craig played a perfect game, I could tell he was putting everything into it, and gave us a chance to come back and tie that game up. Would we have moved the ball and scored when Gamble got his INT, had he never been injured? We'll never know. What we do know is that Craig has pulled us through dozens of times in the past few years. He's not incredibly talented or skilled, but the guy is smart and he knows how to win. That's not a knock on Scott McMullen, in fact, it's not a commentary on him at all. I see SM and CK as a wash more or less when it comes to who is the better QB. Both have their positives and negatives, and my opinion is that those largely balance out.

    Anyway, just talking about it all. Maybe I've got blinders or something on when I say I feel Craig played well before the injury. I saw the overthrown balls, and I groaned when they happened and commented to my wife that I bet Scott would have hit some of those. At the same time, I also felt that Craig probably gave us the best chance to win. Sometimes you feel better about the intangibles than you do the tangibles, and I suspect that's what led to Craig going back in later in the game. Who knows besides JT, Craig and Scott? In retrospect (and at the time for many of us), it doesn't seem like a great decision, but that's assuming Scott would have played better, and he hadn't in the previous couple possessions. So again, all unknown. It's a matter of history now, we'll have to be content to be happy about a 10-2 season (not that hard) and whatever bowl comes along, and be happy that until January, we're still the defending national champions.

    Time to take another run at it next year. Despite his flaws, JT brings so much to the table that I bet we'll at least come close again.

    Last year we played for it, this year we were one game away. That doesn't suck. :wink:
     
  14. Oh8ch

    Oh8ch Cognoscente of Omphaloskepsis Staff Member

    I have been fighting the same battle in defense of CK on BN. Nothing against Scotty, but everyone is talking about his being 'red hot'.

    Here are the facts.

    On his TD drive Ross had 14 of the 22 total rushing yards he had all day. That helps.

    McMullen threw four passes to Rbs and TEs. Good throw, but nothing that Michigan wasn't giving us with a 14 points lead at the end of the third quarter.

    His big play on the drive was a 40 yard pass to Holmes who had broken off his route to help a scrambling McMullen. I give Scott credit for finding him, but Holmes was WIDE open. It was nothing like an over-the-shoulder in stride pass.

    Next series three and out.

    Final series - down 14 with Michigan in total prevent - he completes a few before getting picked.

    Not bad, but far from 'red hot'.
     
  15. ashlandbuck

    ashlandbuck Banned

    Oh8ch

    You forgot to mention the pass that Scott lofted down the right side that should've been a 30 yard gain but Jenkins let it go right through his hands

    Clarity

    As soon as someone disagrees with you, you want to send them right over to Bucknuts. I'm not being ridiculous in my statements about Craig. I'm not blaming him for losing this game. I'm just saying that I think Scott would've been better. We were behind by a couple of touchdowns and a pure pocket passer may have been what this team needed.
    I think you get way too defensive over someone saying anything bad about Craig. You should stay off of Bucknuts, It has you frustrated.
    The jist of the saying that "stats are for losers is that in the end they do not tell the whole story. A good example is say someone like Jim Thome. He hits 45 Hr's and had 110 RBI's but the bulk of them come at times when they are already in the lead by 6 or losing by 8. The stats look good but they didn't really mean much in the over all scheme. Can you digest it better now?
     

Share This Page