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

    Huh. Maybe I worded poorly, or maybe you misread, doesn't matter. I'm not at all trying to send you to Bucknuts, you're more than welcome to keep posting here. You mentioned elsewhere you hadn't been there before, I gave the link suggesting that there were more like conversations going on there. That quite a few take it too far, but there are still a ton of great posters over there. Sending you to Bucknuts (even if I was), shouldn't be considered a bad thing. Anyway, I'm not trying to be rid of you.

    I also don't mean to sound defensive. You made a point, I saw it differently. We both made our points, and that's it. You (and anyone else) can be critical of Craig, I am at times myself of course. Just because in this case I thought he actually played well, doesn't mean I'm a groupie of his or something. And saying that shouldn't be read as me saying I don't like him as our starting QB, I do. I just don't feel a personal bias one way or another.

    So again, not trying at all to be combative or defensive. Just sharing my perspective on the issue for whatever it's worth. The only thing I didn't really understand was the "stats are for losers" thing, and I said as much. The rest -- well I thought I was pretty clear on the whole 'happy to agree to disagree' deal.

    Don't take anything too personally, we have no real beef.

    I understand your Thome example. My point earlier is in contrast of that though. Krenzel's good numbers came (I felt and feel) when we did need them. When we were down in the early going and absolutely had to score, he was nearly perfect for a couple critical drives. Doesn't mean he didn't struggle in the first few series badly, and then again later at the end of the game, but he had some moments there.
  2. CleveBucks

    CleveBucks Serenity now Staff Member

    Krenzel did have a hot hand on the first scoring drive, BUT he was definitely not "on" yesterday. Maybe the TV provided a different view than I had. I was directly between the uprights of the goalpost about 20 feet from the field. A great view to see exactly what the QB would see.

    CK was extremely tentative with his passes on the first two drives. The pass to Jenkins would have indeed gone for a TD, and it really was not close to him at all. He had Holmes streaking across the middle later on in the first half. Holmes had a good 3-4 step lead on the DB from the moment he cut across. Krenzel could have hit him a lot earlier for a huge gain, as there was no middle contain by the LB or S. CK waited too long then overthrew. With Holmes's elusiveness in the open field, it would've been a huge gain as well. There were a few others where CK took a sack instead of throwing to a receiver (usually the TE) who was open.

    That is not to say that CK played badly by any stretch of the imagination. He just could not get a consistent rhythm, mainly due to the OL's "Roger Dorn" blocking scheme. It's a huge difference, just look at Navarre. Not one sack the entire game. This was our real problem throughout the day. No OL composure, combined with scUM's OL giving Navarre all day (and he still threw 3 passes that could've gone for picks in the first half alone... with adequate pressure he probably turns it over multiple times).

    The bottom line is that without a legit running game, our passing game wouldn't go anywhere against that D. It's not CK's fault, it's not SM's fault. We were banged up before the game started and were overmatched. A few breaks go our way and this is a completely different ballgame.

    Lydell and Mo Hall both showed a lot of heart given their physical condition. I don't understand why people rip on Mo Hall's kick returns so much. He's got two bum knees. What do people expect? IIRC, he averaged almost 24 yards per return last year.
  3. ashlandbuck

    ashlandbuck Banned

    You don't need to back down from the subtle attempt to send me to Bucknuts. I didn't really understand the first paragraph of your last post. You said something on the lines of "There are like conversations going on over there". Did you mean to say that there are conversations like the one I'm engaged in going on over there?
    Oh yes, Craig didn't come through in a very crucial time. The miss to Jenkins was at a very Crucial time and it hurt. It Should've been a quick six and would've answered scUM's first score. Instead of it being 7-7, It was soon to be 14-0 and the Bucks were never able to quite get over the hump. It May not have been a difference maker in the End but who Knows?
    I liked what Scott did in the Purdue Game and just wanted to see him get the chance to do it again. The guy was nearly perfect in his relief of Craig in that game and He helped turn that game into a victory. He started inside his own ten twice. I would've liked to see him get a chance to start in decent field positions for a couple series. Field position is so crucial and he didn't have it
  4. Clarity

    Clarity Will Bryant Staff Member

    ashland, I'm not backing down from anything. If you had been chatting with me longer, you'd also know that I'm not very subtle when it comes to making my feelings heard. So again, I'll reiterate, my bringing Bucknuts up was because of 2 things (a) your post here and the one about the linebackers was more inline with convos (reasonable ones) going on over there (meaning you'd find a measurable wealth of like minds on the subject), and (b) because you mentioned you had never been there before. That's it. Your posts are a lot like ones that are common on Bucknuts. NOT the insanely bad ones that have people coming over here, those are the zealots.

    Remember the whole point of this thread... My post and point of amusement was NOT that the guy felt Scott should have stayed in the game, but rather that the guy was saying that Tressel is a liability and that we'd be better off had we kept Coop.

    Sorry, that's just assinine any way you look at it. The guy went off the deep end and had a little girl-style hissy fit, and it ended up on a forum. I found (and find) that hysterical.

    As far as my intentions with you, If I wanted you gone, you'd be gone. I don't, you're not. It's really that simple.

    As far as Scott vs. Craig, clearly you're a 'Scott guy' and that's cool. I don't have a problem with that. I've already made my points on the issue, but to gloss over them one last time, I think Craig played well for us. When Scott was in, he played decently as well, but he didn't do anything that suggested there was going to be an increase in production with him behind the wheel. He made some good passes and some bad, I think those guys are overall a wash, and there are times where each may well be a better play than the other.

    So really, let's put this thing to bed, unless you're going to take offense to something on behalf of all veterans again. :wink:

    If you'd like to argue about something, I'm more than happy and willing. But this has no legs. You wanted to see more of Scott, I was happy enough with what I saw as a better performance than Craig than some other games this season, you think Scott could have done more, I don't entirely agree. 'Nuff said. Let's pick another issue if you want a debate. My "agree to disagree" stance takes the wind out of this one, and we can't really argue about my intentions when I brought up Bucknuts, as I'm the only one who knows what they were.
  5. Hubbard

    Hubbard Administrator's Staff Member Bookie

    Hehe :groove:
  6. ashlandbuck

    ashlandbuck Banned

    I guees it's just that you said you had quit going there for good and then suggested I go there.
    OK, I'll put it to bed.
    You lost me on the Vet comment. Yeah, I come from a long line of Vets, WWI, WWII, Korea and myself a Gulf war vet. My uncle was killed in the battle of the bulge. So I get a little defensive :(
  7. Clarity

    Clarity Will Bryant Staff Member

    I quit because of a minority, and because I wasn't having any fun there anymore. But a lot of great posters still go there.

    I understand how and why you took that as a hint to go away, try and take my word when I say I didn't mean it that way.

    Anyway, no problems here. I think (in retrospect) I might have overtalked the positives of Craig's play. I still feel he had a decent game overall, but I made it sound like it was one of his best efforts, when it wasn't. I think he was hitting more than he was missing, and that he really did have some stretches where he was on fire, but NO question that he missed some relatively "gimme" passes.

    The vet thing was just a friendly joke. I'm a vet, and like you, there's a long history of them in my family on both sides. Oddly, I was the first (as far as I know) guy of all of them who decided to at least start by enlisting.
  8. ashlandbuck

    ashlandbuck Banned

    When did you enlist? What branch? where did you serve? My grandfather was in Europe in WWI. My Uncle Was a FO in II. My dad was in Korea in the Army and I was a captains driver in the army during the Gulf War. (yeah, I had it made)
    I hope it's ok I I ask this stuff on this forum
  9. Clarity

    Clarity Will Bryant Staff Member

    It's no problem, traffic is still low enough here that noone is going to complain too much, and if they do, I'll abuse my access and change their nick to "Shirley". (Just kidding).

    I was SIGINT for the Corps out of Kaneohe Bay, MCAS in Hawaii. Signed initially for the one flight MOS (C130 navigator) for enlisted folks, as my intention was to get a commission and become a pilot. Got pulled aside and redirected (voluntarily) by the NSA for cryptolinguistics at Parris Island shortly after arriving at boot camp. Went in 10/89, got out 9/93 after a botched jaw surgery. Had been approved for an NROTC ride to UPenn, was at a physical to determine my eligibility for a flight school guarantee when they discovered a growth in my jaw. Later, cutting it out, they made some mistakes and the end result was I wouldn't be a flyer. A week or two later, they decided they'd rather spend the money sending a "non-damaged" (their term) candidate through college. A week or two later, I was basically given the option of a promotion to E-5 and two more years in my then-current desk job as training chief for a company in the 1st Radio Battalion -- or adjust my contract to 4 years (from 6) and get out more or less then and there having completed a normal tour. I took the latter and ended up at OSU. All in all, had a great time while I was in, would do it all again in a heartbeat, and I don't envy my buddies who are now (a) flying CH53s in the Middle East, or (b) working intel in the DC area, and/or (c) trying desperately to avoid more sea duty as they hit O-4. Quite a few of my friends took the Navy option offered to former Marines who go NROTC. The prospect of ending up 0300/Infantry officers despite their intel backgrounds wasn't an appealing gamble. The helo pilot was MECEP though, which is a different commissioning program entirely, and doesn't afford that option -- which was fine, he was and is the consummate Marine.

    For the rest of my fam, dad was a USMC Capt. in Vietnam. Grandfather an Army Maj. in II. Great Uncle an Admiral in command of the Texas group for quite some time there. Lots of military, all commissioned, I just had this notion that I really wanted to be enlisted before leading enlisted. Still agree with the philosophy in many ways, but what I know now is that my time as a 'troop' wasn't going to really speak at all to my responsibilities as an officer. Never got a chance to really find out though. Not something that entirely upsets me looking back. Had I not gotten out, I never would have gone to OSU. Never would have married my wife, wouldn't have my dogs, etc.

    If you want to talk about it more, we don't need to bore everyone else with it. Just email me at will (at) bryants (dot) net.
  10. CharlotteBuckeye62

    CharlotteBuckeye62 Buckeye Planet Old Fart

    This thread hasn't been boring.

    I really enjoy getting insites into "who" are posters are.

    One of the things I liked about Sound Off on Bucknuts was that I got to find out a bit of infromation on so many of those guys.
  11. gbearbuck

    gbearbuck Herbie for President

    I'm not miliary however I enjoy reading about folks... don't stop the banter on account of me... to stick with the theme of the post, my grandfater was a flight instructor during the WWII days (long line of military folks in his line)... my wifes father is retired military... he actually was the comander of a base in Saudi that held the largest wepons depot in the nation (at that time)... the airforce kept most of the bombs/missles/ammo on his base and would send big planes in to pick them up and deliver them to the bases where the fighter/bomber squadrens were based out of... kind of neat when you think about it...
  12. 3yardsandacloud

    3yardsandacloud Administrator Emeritus


    Seems like a good place to add this. Buckeye27fan send me a PM this morning. Seems he is deploying for 6 mo. (NAVY) and is worried that his membership/account will be terminated for inactivity. I told him it would NOT (hope I'm right about that Clarity), but it would be nice for us to send out our best wishes to him/her. God speed and come home soon Buckeye27fan!

  13. Clarity

    Clarity Will Bryant Staff Member

    I dropped him an email, but I'll respond here as well. No, this software does not delete inactive accounts no matter how long the poster is gone. He'll be fine.
  14. ashlandbuck

    ashlandbuck Banned


    I had you pictured as an older guy. You're evidently a lot younger than me. Thanks for answering my questions but when you start using military abbreviations and acronyms you lose me.
    If you enjoy reading and watching TV, read and/or watch the mini series "the band of brothers". The best read and WWII show I've ever seen. I read the book first which usually means the movie will disappoint but it didn't. Both were really entertaining.
    Only 1 commisioned in my family, the Uncle in WWII. His was a battlefield commision.
  15. Clarity

    Clarity Will Bryant Staff Member

    Agreed, Band of Brothers was outstanding. I've got it here on DVD, and was just thinking about rewatching it the other day. The only 'chapter' of it I didn't care for was the odd one directed by Tom Hanks, the seemingly out of place violin episode.

    SIGINT, is an intelligence community term for Signals Intelligence. Specifically the interception and interpretation of 3rd party communications. My role was cryptology and linguistics, I spent time in Monterey CA learning Korean, and then San Angelo TX learning North Korean terminology, assets, history, capacity, planning, etc. When they talk about interrogators and translators in the military community, that's part of my community. When they talk about 'intercepting communications' or 'chatter', that's another part.

    NSA is the National Security Agency.

    MOS is a Corps term for your job.

    MCAS is Marine Corps Air Station.

    NROTC and MECEP are commissioning programs available for application from enlisted guys.

    Not being an ass, just translating. I shouldn't have jumped into abbreviations, it's a force of habit.

    And yeah, I'm a younger guy. I get that a lot. :wink:

Share This Page