Perhaps not a big loss.If he was a WR then it’s no big loss. Some self proclaimed expert claims that football players don’t really consider WR’s to be actual football players.
Those of us who actually played beyond video games know better but that ‘self proclaimed expert’ has supported it with nothing so it must be true.
Which part was a mischaracterization?Perhaps not a big loss.
No need for the mischaracterization, though, assuming you're referring to me
No. Read better means you haven't read well enough to not mischaracterize.Which part was a mischaracterization?
I got the standard laughing emoji, waiting for the customary ‘read better’ response which is code for ‘once again the facts and logic don’t support my position’
Like when people "mis characterized" you for this gem?No. Read better means you haven't read well enough to not mischaracterize.
I've never once told anyone to read better for any other reason.
In this case you are mischaracterizing, in the exact same way my comments about receivers, that you are referring to, were mischaracterized in a thread a couple weeks ago.
And that mischaracterizion was already corrected in that thread. Read better
It was probably all the fans on this message board, specifically, talking negative about the program that ran him off.Listed on roster.
Too bad. Had high hopes for the kid.
Hopefully he can find his way in whatever his next step is
Yeah. All that toxicity. And the kid probably didn't want to block.It was probably all the fans on this message board, specifically, talking negative about the program that ran him off.
Amirite?........![]()
Well done, sir. Well done.It was probably all the fans on this message board, specifically, talking negative about the program that ran him off.
Amirite?........![]()
Lol, why would he have been on this board?It was probably all the fans on this message board, specifically, talking negative about the program that ran him off.
Amirite?........![]()
The community is no longer toxic.Yeah. All that toxicity. And the kid probably didn't want to block.
Read betterThe community is no longer toxic.
As I predicted, the negativity has gone down as the offense has improved, and regardless of less winning
I never said he was on this board. Stop mischaracterizing me.Lol, why would he have been on this board?
At least he shouldn't have been
Yes. And the rest of that thread reveals that quote to have been one of a few different figure of speeches I used to convey the dynamic of lineman not always respecting and trusting reveivers as much.Like when people "mis characterized" you for this gem?
"linemen hate receivers on their own team. Don't consider them real football players. Quite common
Post #110 from the "Receivers" thread
Words have meanings and details matter. You threw crap out and got called out for it. Par for the course for you. You then attempted to walk it back.Yes. And the rest of that thread reveals that quote to have been one of a few different figure of speeches I used to convey the dynamic of lineman not always respecting and trusting reveivers as much.
I think I also referred to it as, "lesser than". Which isn't hard to understand. Lineman rightfully consider the work they do on the field, and in practice alone, to be harder than what receivers have to do. Why would they consider receivers their equal? Welcome to football.
Nobody's literally saying receivers aren't considered football players. You guys are really something.
Turns out people usually have a pretty good of what they've previously posted.
I too, played and coached the game. Not much for video games
A clear figure of speech.Words have meanings and details matter. You threw crap out and got called out for it. Par for the course for you. You then attempted to walk it back.
"linemen hate receivers on their own team. Don't consider them real football players. Quite common"
Which type of figure of speech was the above gem?
Gotcha b****.The community is no longer toxic.
As I predicted, the negativity has gone down as the offense has improved, and regardless of less winning
Not true, jackassGotcha b****.
Alright fellas. Stop engaging with eyes. He's a Nebraska troll from the main boards.
Thread is derailing
What happened with Smith?
Lol sorry. You let the mask slip too much. Gotta let the people know who they're dealing with.Not true, jackass
But only so much.Throw the ball
Was it a figure of speech when you saidA clear figure of speech.
Again, if you believe anyone is literally saying receivers aren't football players, you're an idiot.
And again, the rest of the content of the thread clearly doesn't paint the picture in such literal terms. Which I'm sure is why you aren't citing any of it.
Not to mention, it was explained to have been a figure a speech in that thread, and done so completely legitimately.
You're an idiot to misrepresent a sentiment that was clearly expressed in another thread
NoWas it a figure of speech when you said
"How about this? Receivers are the least important position in football? Is that a more agreeable way to put it?"
From post 106 of the Receivers thread.
I have no problem with passingI think all the toxicity toward passing that Eyes has created is preventing quality receivers from wanting to come to Iowa.
I actually think KF believes that, which is one of the reasons we haven’t won anything significant in 17 years.But only so much.
Too much will make it harder to win, according to KF himself
Of course he believes it. That's why I said, "according to KF".I actually think KF believes that, which is one of the reasons we haven’t won anything significant in 17 years.
Oooops, more quotes? Laughing emoji heading your way. Somewhere the fullbacks are raising a glass and saying ‘someone else thinks we are not last? The fool’Was it a figure of speech when you said
"How about this? Receivers are the least important position in football? Is that a more agreeable way to put it?"
From post 106 of the Receivers thread.
DERRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRPI actually think KF believes that, which is one of the reasons we haven’t won anything significant in 17 years.
Not to be that guy but if you are saying read better a lot maybe it should be write better?No. Read better means you haven't read well enough to not mischaracterize.
I've never once told anyone to read better for any other reason.
In this case you are mischaracterizing, in the exact same way my comments about receivers, that you are referring to, were mischaracterized in a thread a couple weeks ago.
And that mischaracterizion was already corrected in that thread. Read better