What did we learn-Wyoming edition

[RedDenver]

The point I was trying to make about Navy had nothing to do with Michigan State at least on my part. My point is that when people on this board say you have to throw the ball to be successful I don't agree. Not saying you don't need to be able to throw the ball. If you take the time to look up Navy's recruiting classes then compare that to their record on the field I'd say their system is pretty successful

Navy is not what would be considered a successful program to emulate. Sorry, but that's batcrap crazy dude.

Especially when they play such weak teams from their conference...put them in the B1G with their offense as it is and they end up looking like Northwestern this year.

Totally agree with this.

The service academies can't recruit 300 lb fat linemen because of height/weight restrictions imposed by the military. You can get a waiver if your BMI shows a low fat content (weight lifters that pack on muscle for instance) but there is no such waiver for someone with a beer gut. They have other restrictions and disadvantages as well. How many kids want to go play for a service academy and then have to serve in the military for an extended period. (How long depends on your career path.)

Navy's starting OL is taller and heavier than most of NU's starting OL.

NU has disadvantages, too. We should admit that and figure out ways to attack obliquely rather than frontal assaults on the Alabama's and USC's of the world.

Not true at all

LT 6'5" 290 / 6'4" 281

LG 6'7" 300 / 6'3" 297

C 6'1" 295 / 6'2" 271

RG 6'4" 295 / 6'3" 294

RT 6'9" 315 / 6'4" 300

Avg 6'5" 299 / 6'3" 289

http://www.huskers.com/SportSelect.dbml?SPSID=4&SPID=22

http://grfx.cstv.com/photos/schools/navy/sports/m-footbl/auto_pdf/2016-17/depth_chart_event/depth_chart.pdf

So... exactly none of Navy's OL are taller and heavier than NU's.

 

[RedDenver]

Your original statement is completely false. But good job coming back and moving the goalposts, which is your typical move.

None of my argument is false - you are just hyper attentive to minor throwaway statements.

If I'd simply said, "Navy's OL is approximately the same size as Nebraska's," what would you argue?

Your previous statement is entirely false. If you'd used different words with a different meaning, then yes, you'd get a different reaction.

 

[Landlord]

First you make a statement.

Navy's starting OL is taller and heavier than most of NU's starting OL.

Then that statement gets proven to be factually inaccurate.

I forget that I have to be hyper precise with every statement.

It's not a matter of preciseness. Your statement wasn't kinda true or more or less accurate. It was a false statement. It was proven as such. The only way to be hyper precise would be to say that ALL of Navy's starting OL are taller/bigger than Nebraska's.

But then you change the course of conversation, and what you were trying to say, away from the things you said that were inaccurate.

The minor difference noted above in weight and height hardly "destroys" the argument that Navy has more than one option when it comes to running an offense.

 

[Red Five]

Your original statement is completely false. But good job coming back and moving the goalposts, which is your typical move.

None of my argument is false - you are just hyper attentive to minor throwaway statements.

If I'd simply said, "Navy's OL is approximately the same size as Nebraska's," what would you argue?

I wanted to stay out of this thread because it has turned into a sh#t show like many others.

If you had said they are approximately the same size, I wouldn't have said a thing. But you didn't.

I am not hyper attentive to anything. I just read that and thought it couldn't be true, so I looked it up.

And I am glad to see that you think you have a lot of "throwaway statements". Many of us agree.

 

[Redux]

I forget that I have to be hyper precise with every statement.

Yeah because you would never ask that of somebody else.

Can you provide a link?

 

[Count 'Bility]

First you make a statement.

Navy's starting OL is taller and heavier than most of NU's starting OL.

Then that statement gets proven to be factually inaccurate.

I forget that I have to be hyper precise with every statement.

It's not a matter of preciseness. Your statement wasn't kinda true or more or less accurate. It was a false statement. It was proven as such. The only way to be hyper precise would be to say that ALL of Navy's starting OL are taller/bigger than Nebraska's.

But then you change the course of conversation, and what you were trying to say, away from the things you said that were inaccurate.

The minor difference noted above in weight and height hardly "destroys" the argument that Navy has more than one option when it comes to running an offense.

is this the part where CM denies being proven wrong about being proven wrong?

 

[flfmrredfan]

Those of you jumping on CM, why don't you read post #376 again, specifically this:

"1. Dimensions of Navy's OL this year: OT - 6'4" 300lbs, OG - 6'3" 294lbs, C - 6'2" 271lbs, OG - 6'3" 297lbs, OT - 6'4" 281lbs. Behind them you have 3 guys who are in the 295+ range, including a 330 pounder - all are 6'2" or taller. That's basically no different than the dimensions of most of our OL starters and backups."

He stated exactly what many of you thought he didn't, yet instead, you selectively choose to jump all over his later hyperbolic statement.

By the way, how come none of you jumping on CM, didn't jump on LOMS for his false statement, which provoked CM's response in the first place?

That's a rhetorical question, of course, because I know why: your agenda wouldn't let you read what you should have read.

 

[Count 'Bility]

Those of you jumping on CM, why don't you read post #376 again, specifically this:

"1. Dimensions of Navy's OL this year: OT - 6'4" 300lbs, OG - 6'3" 294lbs, C - 6'2" 271lbs, OG - 6'3" 297lbs, OT - 6'4" 281lbs. Behind them you have 3 guys who are in the 295+ range, including a 330 pounder - all are 6'2" or taller. That's basically no different than the dimensions of most of our OL starters and backups."

He stated exactly what many of you thought he didn't, yet instead, you selectively choose to jump all over his later hyperbolic statement.

By the way, how come none of you jumping on CM, didn't jump on LOMS for his false statement, which provoked CM's response in the first place?

That's a rhetorical question, of course, because I know why: your agenda wouldn't let you read what you should have read.

and then 8 posts later he said "navys oline is heavier and taller than most of Nebraka's". Which is factually false. And only adds to the point that CM is quite frankly, a usually incorrect, schitzphrenic pain in the a$$.

So. What happened here-which happens a lot with him but in this case doing actually worked against him-is he again "moved the goalposts" and completely changed the dynamic of the discussion. Usually he does this after he realizes he's wrong as hell. This time, as you have pointed out, he was good to begin with, and then did it anyway, and wound up being wrong anyway.

who are you?

 

[commando]

somehow we learned that navys line is not actually bigger than nebraskas line in the "what did we learn from the wyoming vs nebraska game?" thread.

 

[Count 'Bility]

somehow we learned that navys line is not actually bigger than nebraskas line in the "what did we learn from the wyoming vs nebraska game?" thread.

we also learned that it is almost as big, Bo Pelini is just like Mark Dantonio, and the option is the only thing that can cure cancer.

 

[Red Five]

somehow we learned that navys line is not actually bigger than nebraskas line in the "what did we learn from the wyoming vs nebraska game?" thread.

I can't wait to see what we learn in the Oregon thread

 

[Redux]

somehow we learned that navys line is not actually bigger than nebraskas line in the "what did we learn from the wyoming vs nebraska game?" thread.

I can't wait to see what we learn in the Oregon thread

Why Frank Solich should have won the Heisman his Senior season and why Youngstown State could be approaching dynasty status.

 

[Landlord]

By the way, how come none of you jumping on CM, didn't jump on LOMS for his false statement, which provoked CM's response in the first place?

Here's at least one reason why:

My statement was false. I was incorrect and spouting off a talking point I've always heard but never actually researched myself. My bad, it was incorrect, no big deal made out of it.

It's really easy to admit you're wrong. I'd like to think I do it often, and that contributes to people not ripping into me. CM gets ripped into because he has a body of evidence 3,300 posts in that shows when he's proven wrong, he digs into the ground even further trying to deflect, distract, and contort with things like, "The original argument was...", "I guess I have to be hyper specific...", "Can you provide a link?", and so on and so forth ad nauseum.

 

[junior4949]

I think people are getting their panties in a wad over very little here. Both sides here have very valid points. It has been cussed and discussed here to death that we have a few disadvantages when it comes to recruiting. Most will agree that we're not going to consistently year in and year out bring in top 10 recruiting classes. Through the 90's, we literally had all the stars align for us. First, we got Frazier who really did a lot more for the team from the mental part of the game than he ever did with his athletics. It was his refuse to lose and refuse to let anyone slack off that put us over the hump. Then, you combine that with some extreme local talent being produced in-state especially on the OL. Then, you sprinkle in some very good speed and talent at the LB and secondary positions. Boom! A well oiled machine. By 95', we basically were on auto pilot. We easily win the NC with local walk-on Turman at QB.

It matters very little what offense we run. What really matters is we get back to that well oiled machine where if one part breaks we simply plug in another part. A pass heavy offense makes this a bit more difficult, but it can be done. Leach has been doing it for years. Ohio State won the NC a couple of years ago with their third string QB. It can be done. We just need a couple more years of building depth.

 

[Count 'Bility]

I think people are getting their panties in a wad over very little here. Both sides here have very valid points. It has been cussed and discussed here to death that we have a few disadvantages when it comes to recruiting. Most will agree that we're not going to consistently year in and year out bring in top 10 recruiting classes. Through the 90's, we literally had all the stars align for us. First, we got Frazier who really did a lot more for the team from the mental part of the game than he ever did with his athletics. It was his refuse to lose and refuse to let anyone slack off that put us over the hump. Then, you combine that with some extreme local talent being produced in-state especially on the OL. Then, you sprinkle in some very good speed and talent at the LB and secondary positions. Boom! A well oiled machine. By 95', we basically were on auto pilot. We easily win the NC with local walk-on Turman at QB.

It matters very little what offense we run. What really matters is we get back to that well oiled machine where if one part breaks we simply plug in another part. A pass heavy offense makes this a bit more difficult, but it can be done. Leach has been doing it for years. Ohio State won the NC a couple of years ago with their third string QB. It can be done. We just need a couple more years of building depth.

it was 1994. it wasnt easy. And Turman only played 4 quarters of QB.