TheSker and GBRedneck

It'sNotAFakeID

It'sNotAFakeID

New member
How do you all feel about these two? It's one thing to have a legit concern about the performance and the staff and express that in a constructive manner. It's another thing to continue to do it in the fashion these guys do.

 
I don't know what to think about TheSker. He definitely likes to point out anything negative that he can come up with. But I haven't noticed anything breaking any rules. Unless you have some examples. He's one that people need to Ignore.

GBRedneck I don't see in the same boat. From what I've seen, he's actually contributing to the discussion. He's not really high on the new coaches but it's not just "they suck" he's actually talking about what's going on during the games.

But I'll try to keep a closer eye on both and see if I'm missing something.

 
Looked into GBRedneck a little bit more. I think part of the problem is there's a lot of ammunition out there right now. There was a rash of Bo and Callahan references in threads this week and he likes to jump in on them. He's not the one bringing them up but he doesn't mind piling on. But I'm not seeing anything out of line.

 
GBRedneck in particular is about to be Polo. Every post is a gripe or a crack. He is royally pissed that we hired Riley and this board is going to be his outlet. Exactly like Polo, he has zero respect for anyone who doesn't agree with his opinions (sorry, truths) and it bleeds through.

I only responded because another idiotic "but, but, but, BO!" response was injected into my enlightening Callahan/Riley comparison.
Click to expand...
Like Polo, he needs his own board.

It's the same with TheSker. Wasn't this guy arguing that 7-5 last year should be OK to keep Pelini? Wasn't he one who loved to point out how patient everyone needed to be because of Osborne? Is his current stance genuine, or is he upset about what happened to Pelini and fighting for Pelini's honor by applying what he sees as other people's arguments to Riley? We're not going to have the same nasty Year 7 atmosphere extended on this board because a few grouches think that would only be fair, are we?

I don't see this as discussion. They're angry -- completely disgusted, to borrow GBR's own terms -- and they will spew it all over the boards. How on topic and allowable that is, maybe a matter of scale. There's a line between discussion and trolling. They may not have crossed it far enough yet, but they're close. I agree with FakeID.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I think GBRedneck participates in discussion. He's just gotten into the mix in some of the more contentious threads and that's what's standing out to people.

Here's a sample of some other posts:

GBRedneck said:
Our national statistical ranking in Yds/Attempt is the same for rushing and passing. But in pure yards, our rank is much, much lower for rushing because of so many fewer attempts.

Despite the average results of an individual play being similar for rushing or passing, we put all of our eggs in the passing basket.
Click to expand...
GBRedneck said:
Good OP. FYI, the Sagarin rankings are heavily influenced by last season's results until somewhere around the 5th or 6th game when there are enough transitive matchups to connect all the teams.
Click to expand...
GBRedneck said:
Stumpy1 said:
How many walk ons did Wisconsin take to Dallas? That is what you should be looking for. Who cares how many played. That isn't the point of the other discussion.
Click to expand...
If you can find their travel roster, I'll do the analysis. But there's no reason to believe it will be much different than ours based on the numbers that saw the field (participation report). Let's assume they brought 79. They played 50. 12 were former walkons. Do you think the 29 that didn't play were all or even predominantly scholarship athletes? 10-15 of those 29 who didn't play will be former walkons.
Click to expand...
GBRedneck said:
StPaulHusker said:
That's probably not totally accurate because TO was allowed 24 more scholarship players on the team than they are allowed now.
Click to expand...
Not in '97. The limit has been 85 since '92.
Click to expand...
So, again, I'm not denying that he has a negative slant to his viewpoint. But I think it's a fairly mild tone for the most part. And he's not just posting to have something negative to say. He's done some research on several topics and posted it there. I guess I don't see the issue with opposing viewpoints as long as the discussion is centered around the football team and not other posters. That's what makes for some interesting (lively?) discussion.

I don't see really any personal attacks from him. The one zoogs posted is on the edge but not necessarily directed at anyone in particular. Maybe I've missed some others but from what I've seen people have been more attacking towards him than he's been toward others.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Here's another thought: what if we had a Gripe Forum?

Regular (and most) discussion, critical or not, stays in the football forum. But provide another place for people who need to get it off their chest about how terrible things are, to do so to their heart's content. Something for everyone, right here.

 
I mean ... don't get me wrong. I don't care for really anything TheSker or 74Hunter have to say. It's pretty much always negative and it's basically the same thing over and over.

I don't think GBRedneck does the same thing. He's negative but he has points and stats and different things to try to defend his point of view. People don't have to agree with it but if they don't have to go after him either. At least from his posts that I remember seeing. I'll keep a closer eye out. I don't see him as out to derail every thread with "Riley sucks" or anything like that.

But if people just ignore it - one way or the other - I don't see any of it as a big deal. I bumped the Ignore Function thread and put it back in the Football forum. When I see posts from TheSker or 74Hunter I basically just gloss over them and go to the next post. I realize not everyone will do that but I think if we start moderating negativity it'll be impossible to be consistent. Does this have to go in the Rant Forum or can it stay? Is this too negative or is it a troll? Do people who post here a lot get more leeway than people who just show up after a loss? Just seems like a slippery slope to me.

Hopefully the performance on the field will get better and there will be less to gripe about. That won't stop everyone but it will subside.

 
I'm the same with respect to their posts. To me, it's something about GBR's tone. TheSker and 74 have their viewpoints, sure, but they're a lot less Polo-esque about it. That said, I'm all for giving them all breathing room and just seeing how they get along, rather than leaping into action.

I agree, it's going to be really hard to be consistent. And that's the danger. These aren't going to be the only people who have this take and want to take it to a message board, with varying degrees of etiquette. We even have a term for it -- "seasonal bitcher."

My thought with the Rant Forum is that some of these guys would really like a place where they can just unload on the coaches, or the AD, or negative fans, or positive fans, or anything else they feel is wrong with Husker football and needs to change.

I think we've generaly been none-to-kind to posters who want to come here and just spew all over our board. However, rather than tell them to find some other forum to do their thing, maybe we *can* provide that outlet here, just in its own place. It could save us the trouble of ever having to warn or ban for trolling, etc -- and it might make the rest of the board more pleasant, as readership in that forum will be self-selecting (and fluid, depending on quality of play). But again, consistency in deciding what should go where is probably something that would need to be sorted out. Some overlap is probably OK.

 
Back
Top