Treatise from the "Gang of 14" (Long Read)

[dirk digler]

Originally Posted by Reaper16

Are there really many legitimate reasons to think that Stafford y Sanchez aren't top 5 material? The posters who have tried to express those reasons end up sounding like they don't know much about football. I'd love to see someone with actual football smarts make the case against the two QB's.

My biggest problem with Sanchez is his 16 starts and he wasn't able to beat out Booty last year and only played because Booty was injured.

['Hamas' Jenkins]

Originally Posted by dirk digler

My biggest problem with Sanchez is his 16 starts and he wasn't able to beat out Booty last year and only played because Booty was injured.

Again, misinformed.

Every USC offensive coach told Carroll after practices in '07 that Sanchez>Booty. He overruled them.

He was going to start for them as a RS Frosh before the bogus rape allegations.

[dirk digler]

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins

Again, misinformed.

Every USC offensive coach told Carroll after practices in '07 that Sanchez>Booty. He overruled them.

He was going to start for them as a RS Frosh before the bogus rape allegations.

Excluding the bogus rape charge how does that change anything in 07? Carroll is the head coach he makes the final decision and thought Booty was better or maybe thought Sanchez just wasn't fully ready.

[Mecca]

Originally Posted by dirk digler

Excluding the bogus rape charge how does that change anything in 07? Carroll is the head coach he makes the final decision and thought Booty was better or maybe thought Sanchez just wasn't fully ready.

Because Pete Carroll was always loyal to Booty to a fault, you can go pull up any message board dedicated to SC at that time and see a huge number of posts dedicated to Carrolls man love of Booty and how it cost the Trojans national titles.

[Just Passin' By]

Originally Posted by Mecca

Because Pete Carroll was always loyal to Booty to a fault, you can go pull up any message board dedicated to SC at that time and see a huge number of posts dedicated to Carrolls man love of Booty and how it cost the Trojans national titles.

Again.... opinion, not fact. Now, pull out the quote where Carroll says "Sanchez is definitely the better quarterback, and he gives us the best chance to win, but I'm going with Booty because of my loyalty." and you've got a case. It won't change the "experience" argument, but it will at least strengthen the pointless "why so little experience" argument.

[dirk digler]

Originally Posted by Mecca

Because Pete Carroll was always loyal to Booty to a fault, you can go pull up any message board dedicated to SC at that time and see a huge number of posts dedicated to Carrolls man love of Booty and how it cost the Trojans national titles.

Are you suggesting that Pete Carroll cared more about starting Booty then winning?

[Mecca]

Originally Posted by dirk digler

Are you suggesting that Pete Carroll cared more about starting Booty then winning?

I'm suggesting that Pete Carroll is a stubborn coach that wanted to start his older 5 star QB over his younger one for recruiting purposes...

Booty was the #1 QB in the nation his recruiting year and I do think the effect it would possibly have on QB recruiting played in I also think he thought he would get 2 years out of Sanchez playing this out and when that didn't happen he got upset about it.

Pete Carroll was literally the only person on that coaching staff or at that school that thought Booty deserved to start.

[dirk digler]

Originally Posted by Mecca

I'm suggesting that Pete Carroll is a stubborn coach that wanted to start his older 5 star QB over his younger one for recruiting purposes...

Booty was the #1 QB in the nation his recruiting year and I do think the effect it would possibly have on QB recruiting played in I also think he thought he would get 2 years out of Sanchez playing this out and when that didn't happen he got upset about it.

Pete Carroll was literally the only person on that coaching staff or at that school that thought Booty deserved to start.

All football coaches are stubborn so that is no surprise. I can understand the argument that he probably figured Sanchez would stay for 2 more years and I also can understand the argument that the rape allegation might have hurt him as far as Carroll trusting him.

But he still only has 16 starts and my biggest concern is his experience and being a 1-hit wonder.

[DaneMcCloud]

Originally Posted by dirk digler

Are you suggesting that Pete Carroll cared more about starting Booty then winning?

Pete Carroll was concerned about winning, recruiting and the school's image.

He didn't wan the focus of the 2007 football season to be on the rape allegations. He wanted the focus to be on football and the USC program.

How could he look a recruit's parents in the face and tell them that he had their best interests at heart, all the while, playing a QB accused of raping a young USC woman at a party? He'd appear to be "all about football" and not all about the players. He would have lost major credibility.

He made the right decision. Too bad for Sanchez, as he would have had 2 years of starting under his belt, making the draft decision much easier for NFL teams.

[Just Passin' By]

Originally Posted by dirk digler

My biggest problem with Sanchez is his 16 starts and he wasn't able to beat out Booty last year and only played because Booty was injured.

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins

Again, misinformed.

Every USC offensive coach told Carroll after practices in '07 that Sanchez>Booty. He overruled them.

He was going to start for them as a RS Frosh before the bogus rape allegations.

Here is another perfect example of the problem. Dirk is not misinformed at all. He's absolutely correct. Your response is an attempted explanation of WHY it happened, not proof that it didn't.

['Hamas' Jenkins]

Originally Posted by Just Passin' By

Here is another perfect example of the problem. Dirk is not misinformed at all. He's absolutely correct. Your response is an attempted explanation of WHY it happened, not proof that it didn't.

It's not explanation, it's empirical fact.

Mark Sanchez was demonstrably better than JD Booty in all Spring Practices, and all the coaches told Carroll he should be #1.

The mere fact that Carroll can recruit does not mean he knows how to coach at all. Look at his stint in the NFL, FFS.

[Just Passin' By]

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins

It's not explanation, it's empirical fact.

Mark Sanchez was demonstrably better than JD Booty in all Spring Practices, and all the coaches told Carroll he should be #1.

The mere fact that Carroll can recruit does not mean he knows how to coach at all. Look at his stint in the NFL, FFS.

Ok, so you don't know the difference between "fact" and "opinion"? The "fact" is that Booty beat out Sanchez for the job. The "opinion" is that he didn't do so based upon performance and/or the chance to win games.

['Hamas' Jenkins]

Originally Posted by Just Passin' By

Ok, so you don't know the difference between "fact" and "opinion"? The "fact" is that Booty beat out Sanchez for the job. The "opinion" is that he didn't do so based upon performance and/or the chance to win games.

I'm sorry, but when I see the paucity of analysis that you bring Re: USC and compare it to one of our best football posters who has followed USC religiously for years, posts on USC boards, and keeps track of all of their moves within their program, I'm going to believe him over you, especially when combined with the rampant intellectual dishonest that you've displayed in all of your fabricated "arguing for the sake of arguing" posts, such as the fact that teams are better off searching outside of the first round.

Again, I apologize that something as impossibly simple as basic addition and how to read a number line (things like 60>40) are lost upon you, I really am. Because I wouldn't have to sit here and watch you fumble around and **** them up.

[Just Passin' By]

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins

I'm sorry, but when I see the paucity of analysis that you bring Re: USC and compare it to one of our best football posters who has followed USC religiously for years, posts on USC boards, and keeps track of all of their moves within their program, I'm going to believe him over you, especially when combined with the rampant intellectual dishonest that you've displayed in all of your fabricated "arguing for the sake of arguing" posts, such as the fact that teams are better off searching outside of the first round.

This is exactly my point about your posts. You post complete nonsense and act as if you're handing out the Rosetta Stone. Then when you get called on it, you can't handle it. I never said that teams are better off searching outside of the first round. As for what Mecca opines, it's still OPINION. Try to get that through your head. Mecca is not, as far as I know, Pete Carroll using the ChiefsPlanet message board.

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins

Again, I apologize that something as impossibly simple as basic addition and how to read a number line (things like 60>40) are lost upon you, I really am. Because I wouldn't have to sit here and watch you fumble around and **** them up.

And, yet again, you can't seem to grasp simple things. Call me when 60=100 and then you'll have an ironclad case. When it's a 60/40 split, you've got shit. Which is basically what your argument is.