General4AU wrote:

General4AU wrote:

BamaAlex wrote:
It makes one wonder just how long it will be before the au fans actually start blaming Chizik for their youth problems.  They sure do seem intent on blaming it on everyone else but Chizik   

Based on some recent and past posts, at least the Tennessee fans on this board are holding their coach accountable.  Wow, what a concept!  The aubs should try that!

This posts, which happens to follow mine, seems out of the blue.

I am not sure what Auburn fans you are referring to, but I have multiple times on this board indicated it is Coach Chizik's fault for the most part right now. And, I even posted a link to an article which indicated that on this board within the last two weeks. Even though I can't find the link, here is another link to the article,

  www.al.com/sports/index...f_the_hook.html



Even more obvious, here are some of my quotes just within this thread alone:

"Granted, the problem with youth is for the most part Coach Chizik's (and to a lesser degree [now] Coach Tuberville's) self-created issue."

"3 - Their first recruiting class appears to have been a complete bust based on how many of those players are no longer in the program . . . "
4 - The team has already had too many disciplinary issues for their short tenure based on Auburn's Fulmer Cup rankings."

"No disputing that it is Auburn's own fault we are continuously young, but hopefully that problem is in the process of being fixed."

I am the most frequent Auburn poster on this board (and the only one to post in this thread in almost a month), and it is obvious you read most of my posts because you so frequently post right after me (for some reason). You mention the Tennessee fans on this board, so it appears you are using this board as the reference point for your above "opinion."

So, what is your point? Are you just stirring the pot and going to run away without elaborating or discussing your point? 

Since you seldom address anyone directly (other than nodding your head in agreement to someone elses' original thought), I doubt you will answer those questions. And, hopefully your baby sitter will see that there is a very clear reason for me to respond to this post this time (even though he can't see that fact on other posts - rather choosing to make comments about "stalking") and let you stand on your own.

General4AU wrote:

General4AU wrote: Y

BamaAlex wrote:
It makes one wonder just how long it will be before the au fans actually start blaming Chizik for their youth problems.  They sure do seem intent on blaming it on everyone else but Chizik   

Based on some recent and past posts, at least the Tennessee fans on this board are holding their coach accountable.  Wow, what a concept!  The aubs should try that!

This posts, which happens to follow mine, seems out of the blue.

I am not sure what Auburn fans you are referring to, but I have multiple times on this board indicated it is Coach Chizik's fault for the most part right now. And, I even posted a link to an article which indicated that on this board within the last two weeks. Even though I can't find the link, here is another link to the article,

  www.al.com/sports/index...f_the_hook.html



Even more obvious, here are some of my quotes just within this thread alone:

"Granted, the problem with youth is for the most part Coach Chizik's (and to a lesser degree [now] Coach Tuberville's) self-created issue."

"3 - Their first recruiting class appears to have been a complete bust based on how many of those players are no longer in the program . . . "
4 - The team has already had too many disciplinary issues for their short tenure based on Auburn's Fulmer Cup rankings."

"No disputing that it is Auburn's own fault we are continuously young, but hopefully that problem is in the process of being fixed."

I am the most frequent Auburn poster on this board (and the only one to post in this thread in almost a month), and it is obvious you read most of my posts because you so frequently post right after me (for some reason). You mention the Tennessee fans on this board, so it appears you are using this board as the reference point for your above "opinion."

So, what is your point? Are you just stirring the pot and going to run away without elaborating or discussing your point? 

Since you seldom address anyone directly (other than nodding your head in agreement to someone elses' original thought), I doubt you will answer those questions. And, hopefully your baby sitter will see that there is a very clear reason for me to respond to this post this time (even though he can't see that fact on other posts - rather choosing to make comments about "stalking") and let you stand on your own.

bamafaninauburn wrote: How many times can you say young in one article?

http://www.al.com/sports/index..._young_tig.html

General4AU wrote: Through all of these threads I have no clue what question you asked. If you want to repeat it or point it out and it is worth of answering, I will see what I can do. I don't normally not answer a question or give an opinion if it is warranted.

---------------------------------------------
--- Tidefan1976 wrote:

Been at least that long since I asked you a question and still no response. Man up.

Posted: 5/10/2012 9:48 PM

Re: The class that time forgot 

Tidefan1976 wrote:

General4AU wrote: Through all of these threads I have no clue what question you asked. If you want to repeat it or point it out and it is worth of answering, I will see what I can do. I don't normally not answer a question or give an opinion if it is warranted.

---------------------------------------------
--- Tidefan1976 wrote:

Been at least that long since I asked you a question and still no response. Man up.

Posted: 5/10/2012 9:48 PM

Re: The class that time forgot 

---

"What number user name are you on now anyway?"

BamaAlex wrote:
Chizik now is telling the aub fans during his speeches around the state that his team is just "one recruiting class away from being back where they want to be".  Sounds like he's just buying himself more time since obviously the next recruiting class isn't signed until next February, well after he's coached for his fourth season.  And most of the members of that recruiting class then won't be a factor until at least a couple of years into their playing careers, and so even more time is bought with that line of reasoning.  Four years is plenty of time to have turned things around (or not), at least for most every other program.  At ALABAMA, we gave Mike Shula 4 years, and after coming to the realization that giving him any more time would not change the course that we were on, our AD made a decision to fire Shula (even before inking the deal with Saban).  Making that change turned out to be the best decision that Mal Moore has made in his long career!  Obviously though Chizik wants more than 4 years before the aub fans and AD come to that same conclusion that our AD came to.  Imo, Chizik can't milk this "youth" thing forever and keep saying over and over and over again that his team is "almost there". Sort of like the ole adage "What have you done for me lately", the 2010 BCS NC can only go so far and even the aub fans will eventually come to expect some more current results.

ROLL TIDE ROLL !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

General4AU wrote: Oh, I thought it was a legitimate question. When I looked back, I saw this series of statements from you:

"I bet if you added up the post count from all of your user names it would be much more impressive. By the way...are you saying that at AU if you don't play you don't get the training? That explains a lot..."  This was in response to a post that you just so happened to leave out...one where you accused someone of stalking you and said they had more than double the post count that you did.  That's when I told you to add yours up from all of your user names.  Let's not leave out things to try and make you look better, ok?

Here, there is no question about user names. So, when I saw this next post by you, it appeared that you were stating that you had asked a previous question I had not answered (which you did not - because I answered the QUESTION about training):  Try catching up and not just chiming in where you want to.

"Try me Watson. What number user name are you on now anyway? Oh...typical of you to dodge yet another question."

Above is a question and the accusation about a question in the same post. So, it is clear why there was some confusion on my part. In the future, if you are going to make accusation about dodging a question, then I suppose you should actually frame a question in a question format - the question mark can be assumed, but not the question itself.  Well, in this day in age, a question mark does, in fact, signify a question.  I thought you were able to pick up on that on your own, but looks as if I gave you too much credit.


Now, I will address that. First, I don't understand yours or others on this board obsession with user names. That actually is none of anyone's business other than the moderators on the boards in which I post - here and ITAT (and both are FULLY aware of my personal situation and user name(s)). Actually, that topic has nothing to do with SEC or Auburn sports so I am still not understanding why you or the others think it is a topic worthy of this board. I am certain that topic is boring to the other posters on this board who are not obsessed with me and my posts.  It's not an obsession...it was a question. You attacked a poster by saying he had more than double the posts than  you...I basically said to add yours up from all of your user names and then give us a total.  You, as always, ignored it.

Now, so you are caught up to speed - I believe the moderators have already addressed this topic twice now. The first time is in this locked thread:  That's just addressing one of your many user names.  I wasn't saying you were wrong for having yet another name...just wanted to know how many you have used before so that we could get an accurate post count from you since you wanted to use someone else's post count against them.  We have to be fair, right?

 http://forums.scout.com/mb.asp...8912110&p=2

and the second time in this recent post:

http://forums.scout.com/mb.asp...7&t=8993327



So, if you or others continue to be obsesses with me and my posting which are not in any way directed at individuals (stalking) or personal in any way, I request that you take it up with the moderators. Not a moderator issue.  They have addressed the reason you have another name.  I just asked how many so that we could compare apples to apples.  You don't seem to want to play fair.

As far as discussion that involve the SEC, Auburn, and bama; I will continue to enjoy having those discussions with you and the other posters on this board who have some apparent obsession with me as long as they stay above the personal level. And, I have no problem at all with someone calling me out to back up my statements/opinions (and, if I am wrong, I will admit it), and I will call out others even though some on a message/discussion board have no desire to actually discuss (for some reason).  It's not an obessesion.  But the fact remains that you can't hide from your past.  You spent months and months harping about Saban not publicizing punishment but when it happens with AU, you accuse us of obssessing.  You aren't that important.  But we will continue to call you out on issues dealing with AU...especially if they are ones where you were critical of Alabama when the shoe was on the other foot. And BTW, you rarely ever admit when you are wrong but rather just move on and not address the topic anymore.

We can agree to disagree as other posters do on here daily without having to be called down by the moderators. So, I hope we can continue that same type interaction. This is neither an Auburn board nor a bama board, so it is an even playing field. And, I would love it if we would act that way with self control, not requiring moderation.   I'm not sure it's an even playing field, but that's fine.  We've had a 2 or 3 page discussion locked before but I've seen a 7 or 8 page Big 10 discussion that keeps going and going.  But it's their judgement.  But you can't also complain about 'name calling' if you start a post by calling someone "Sherlock." 

Tidefan1976 wrote:

General4AU wrote: Through all of these threads I have no clue what question you asked. If you want to repeat it or point it out and it is worth of answering, I will see what I can do. I don't normally not answer a question or give an opinion if it is warranted.

---------------------------------------------
--- Tidefan1976 wrote:

Been at least that long since I asked you a question and still no response. Man up.

Posted: 5/10/2012 9:48 PM

Re: The class that time forgot 

---

"What number user name are you on now anyway?"

As long as the moderators allow this thread to remain open with all the crap flowing into it, I will entertain you with answers to your rants.

- Look back to the post before I used the word "stalk." I was accused by bamafaninAuburn of stalking Alex. My point clearly was that Alex has more posts on this board than I do. If you add up the posts I have made on this board and compare that to the same time period for Alex, it is clear that he has many more on this board than I have with his countdowns, and nodding posts. And, if you don't believe that fact - I don't care.

- So, you ask me a question in the first sentence of a paragraph and accusing me of dodging the question in the following sentence, and you can't understand why I was confused as to what you were accusing. It would appear that you are arguing just to argue.

- You need a better definition of the word attack. I am not going to help enlighten you. Once again, quit arguing for the sake of arguing. The point on post counts was to show that I am not following Alex around and posting every time he does. Furthermore, I don't copy his posts from this board to another board, which he has done to my posts on this board three times just this week. Go see BamaMag if you have not already.

- It has been confirmed that I have had one user name that had problems, and the moderators were well aware of that. Beyond that, it is none of yours or any other poster on this board beyond that. I may have had a thousand, but as long as I am only using one on this board I am not in violation of this board’s rules. Again, if you want to do research, check the number of posts I have made on this board with this user name to the same time period for Alex, you will see that I have not matched him one-for-one. Which, clearly was my point. It was not an "attack" on his number of posts on this board. I don't care. He makes his posts to be seen and has no desire to discuss on a discussion board. Therefore, his agenda is clear to everyone.
- Yes, it is a moderator issue. The moderators said leave it alone in a link I posted and told you, me, Alex, inAuburn, etc. to chill. Apparently, some of you did not get the message and continue with attacking, stalking, and trolling. So, the "we will continue" seems to me this is a coordinated effort by you and the other bama fans on this board. That is interesting and disturbing.

- Again, not sure what you are talking about with Saban and Auburn issues and punishment. As far as Auburn is concerned, I am not sure what has not been publicized and punished. If that is a topic you want to discuss, start another thread or just use the one that Alex started to bring out the arrest of T. Reed of Auburn.

- You are kidding about "Sherlock." Do you even know who Sherlock would be? Apparently not. But, I thought you did with the comeback of "Watson." NEITHER of which are considered offensive by anyone, and it is clear that they are investigators. Again, go back to the moderators warning about people trying to be a detective - "maybe you guys should stop playing detective (bamafaninau)." Now, if I would have used the term "bammer" or "Updyke" (which I equate with the word "aub" as an attempted negative connotation), then I would have been rightfully called down for it.

- The playing field being even was completely in reference to this not being an Auburn board or a bama board. So, as long as we can play nice, I think we can honestly discuss if we truly desire to do so. And, I actually consider you as one of those that do - except that you go on the attack quickly and spin excessively.

Tidefan1976 wrote:

General4AU wrote: Oh, I thought it was a legitimate question. When I looked back, I saw this series of statements from you:

"I bet if you added up the post count from all of your user names it would be much more impressive. By the way...are you saying that at AU if you don't play you don't get the training? That explains a lot..."  This was in response to a post that you just so happened to leave out...one where you accused someone of stalking you and said they had more than double the post count that you did.  That's when I told you to add yours up from all of your user names.  Let's not leave out things to try and make you look better, ok?

Here, there is no question about user names. So, when I saw this next post by you, it appeared that you were stating that you had asked a previous question I had not answered (which you did not - because I answered the QUESTION about training):  Try catching up and not just chiming in where you want to.

"Try me Watson. What number user name are you on now anyway? Oh...typical of you to dodge yet another question."

Above is a question and the accusation about a question in the same post. So, it is clear why there was some confusion on my part. In the future, if you are going to make accusation about dodging a question, then I suppose you should actually frame a question in a question format - the question mark can be assumed, but not the question itself.  Well, in this day in age, a question mark does, in fact, signify a question.  I thought you were able to pick up on that on your own, but looks as if I gave you too much credit.


Now, I will address that. First, I don't understand yours or others on this board obsession with user names. That actually is none of anyone's business other than the moderators on the boards in which I post - here and ITAT (and both are FULLY aware of my personal situation and user name(s)). Actually, that topic has nothing to do with SEC or Auburn sports so I am still not understanding why you or the others think it is a topic worthy of this board. I am certain that topic is boring to the other posters on this board who are not obsessed with me and my posts.  It's not an obsession...it was a question. You attacked a poster by saying he had more than double the posts than  you...I basically said to add yours up from all of your user names and then give us a total.  You, as always, ignored it.

Now, so you are caught up to speed - I believe the moderators have already addressed this topic twice now. The first time is in this locked thread:  That's just addressing one of your many user names.  I wasn't saying you were wrong for having yet another name...just wanted to know how many you have used before so that we could get an accurate post count from you since you wanted to use someone else's post count against them.  We have to be fair, right?

 http://forums.scout.com/mb.asp...8912110&p=2

and the second time in this recent post:

http://forums.scout.com/mb.asp...7&t=8993327



So, if you or others continue to be obsesses with me and my posting which are not in any way directed at individuals (stalking) or personal in any way, I request that you take it up with the moderators. Not a moderator issue.  They have addressed the reason you have another name.  I just asked how many so that we could compare apples to apples.  You don't seem to want to play fair.

As far as discussion that involve the SEC, Auburn, and bama; I will continue to enjoy having those discussions with you and the other posters on this board who have some apparent obsession with me as long as they stay above the personal level. And, I have no problem at all with someone calling me out to back up my statements/opinions (and, if I am wrong, I will admit it), and I will call out others even though some on a message/discussion board have no desire to actually discuss (for some reason).  It's not an obessesion.  But the fact remains that you can't hide from your past.  You spent months and months harping about Saban not publicizing punishment but when it happens with AU, you accuse us of obssessing.  You aren't that important.  But we will continue to call you out on issues dealing with AU...especially if they are ones where you were critical of Alabama when the shoe was on the other foot. And BTW, you rarely ever admit when you are wrong but rather just move on and not address the topic anymore.

We can agree to disagree as other posters do on here daily without having to be called down by the moderators. So, I hope we can continue that same type interaction. This is neither an Auburn board nor a bama board, so it is an even playing field. And, I would love it if we would act that way with self control, not requiring moderation.   I'm not sure it's an even playing field, but that's fine.  We've had a 2 or 3 page discussion locked before but I've seen a 7 or 8 page Big 10 discussion that keeps going and going.  But it's their judgement.  But you can't also complain about 'name calling' if you start a post by calling someone "Sherlock." 

Tidefan1976 wrote:

General4AU wrote: Through all of these threads I have no clue what question you asked. If you want to repeat it or point it out and it is worth of answering, I will see what I can do. I don't normally not answer a question or give an opinion if it is warranted.

---------------------------------------------
--- Tidefan1976 wrote:

Been at least that long since I asked you a question and still no response. Man up.

Posted: 5/10/2012 9:48 PM

Re: The class that time forgot 

---

"What number user name are you on now anyway?"

General4AU wrote:

As long as the moderators allow this thread to remain open with all the crap flowing into it, I will entertain you with answers to your rants.

- Look back to the post before I used the word "stalk." I was accused by bamafaninAuburn of stalking Alex. My point clearly was that Alex has more posts on this board than I do. If you add up the posts I have made on this board and compare that to the same time period for Alex, it is clear that he has many more on this board than I have with his countdowns, and nodding posts. And, if you don't believe that fact - I don't care. My point exactly.  Under your current name, maybe he has.  That's why I told you to total all of your posts under all of your names up and then compare.  Alex posts under one name.  You haven't.  It's not a fair comparison.  When you refused to do that, that's when I asked how many names you had so I could do it for you.  You still refuse to do that.  You just dance around things you don't want to answer until people move on.  You've done it under all of your names.

- So, you ask me a question in the first sentence of a paragraph and accusing me of dodging the question in the following sentence, and you can't understand why I was confused as to what you were accusing. It would appear that you are arguing just to argue. Nope...just can't understand how a grown man doesn't recognize a question when there is a perfectly normal question mark at the end of it.  Just another way to dance around something you don't want to answer.

- You need a better definition of the word attack. I am not going to help enlighten you. Once again, quit arguing for the sake of arguing. The point on post counts was to show that I am not following Alex around and posting every time he does. Furthermore, I don't copy his posts from this board to another board, which he has done to my posts on this board three times just this week. Go see BamaMag if you have not already.  Has nothing to do with you complaining about him using Aubs, which is clearly a shortened version of Auburn Fans.  In no way is Gump or Updyke the same.  You like to whine to the moderators but you don't play by the same rules.  My name isn't Sherlock and you know that.  Quit trying to hide behind your little jabs and stand up for once.

- It has been confirmed that I have had one user name that had problems, and the moderators were well aware of that. Beyond that, it is none of yours or any other poster on this board beyond that. I may have had a thousand, but as long as I am only using one on this board I am not in violation of this board’s rules. Again, if you want to do research, check the number of posts I have made on this board with this user name to the same time period for Alex, you will see that I have not matched him one-for-one. Which, clearly was my point. It was not an "attack" on his number of posts on this board. I don't care. He makes his posts to be seen and has no desire to discuss on a discussion board. Therefore, his agenda is clear to everyone.  Not the same.  You as a person have more posts here than Alex does.  That's the point.  You just aren't man enough to admit it.  That is my whole argument.
- Yes, it is a moderator issue. The moderators said leave it alone in a link I posted and told you, me, Alex, inAuburn, etc. to chill. Apparently, some of you did not get the message and continue with attacking, stalking, and trolling. So, the "we will continue" seems to me this is a coordinated effort by you and the other bama fans on this board. That is interesting and disturbing. The whole thing could have been avoided if you had just been honest instead of dodging the issue.  I don't have an issue with how many names you had.  The moderator cleared it up.  I just asked a question after you made an accusation that is, as always, false.

- Again, not sure what you are talking about with Saban and Auburn issues and punishment. As far as Auburn is concerned, I am not sure what has not been publicized and punished. If that is a topic you want to discuss, start another thread or just use the one that Alex started to bring out the arrest of T. Reed of Auburn.  Whatever.  You can hide from what you posted in the past because we know it doesn't exsist anymore, but if you were an honest person you would admit you have been critical about Saban not going public with players punishments but now that Chizik has done the same thing you are fine with it.

- You are kidding about "Sherlock." Do you even know who Sherlock would be? Apparently not. But, I thought you did with the comeback of "Watson." NEITHER of which are considered offensive by anyone, and it is clear that they are investigators. Again, go back to the moderators warning about people trying to be a detective - "maybe you guys should stop playing detective (bamafaninau)." Now, if I would have used the term "bammer" or "Updyke" (which I equate with the word "aub" as an attempted negative connotation), then I would have been rightfully called down for it.  You are a bit to sensative if you let the word Aub bother you.  That is pitiful.  Sherlock doesn't bother me but don't call me something other than my user name if you get offended by the same thing.

- The playing field being even was completely in reference to this not being an Auburn board or a bama board. So, as long as we can play nice, I think we can honestly discuss if we truly desire to do so. And, I actually consider you as one of those that do - except that you go on the attack quickly and spin excessively.  It's obvious that you just want this thread locked so you don't have to face up to your avoiding questions.  You will probably succeed but it doesn't mean you won't get called out on it again.

Tidefan1976 wrote:

General4AU wrote: Oh, I thought it was a legitimate question. When I looked back, I saw this series of statements from you:

"I bet if you added up the post count from all of your user names it would be much more impressive. By the way...are you saying that at AU if you don't play you don't get the training? That explains a lot..."  This was in response to a post that you just so happened to leave out...one where you accused someone of stalking you and said they had more than double the post count that you did.  That's when I told you to add yours up from all of your user names.  Let's not leave out things to try and make you look better, ok?

Here, there is no question about user names. So, when I saw this next post by you, it appeared that you were stating that you had asked a previous question I had not answered (which you did not - because I answered the QUESTION about training):  Try catching up and not just chiming in where you want to.

"Try me Watson. What number user name are you on now anyway? Oh...typical of you to dodge yet another question."

Above is a question and the accusation about a question in the same post. So, it is clear why there was some confusion on my part. In the future, if you are going to make accusation about dodging a question, then I suppose you should actually frame a question in a question format - the question mark can be assumed, but not the question itself.  Well, in this day in age, a question mark does, in fact, signify a question.  I thought you were able to pick up on that on your own, but looks as if I gave you too much credit.


Now, I will address that. First, I don't understand yours or others on this board obsession with user names. That actually is none of anyone's business other than the moderators on the boards in which I post - here and ITAT (and both are FULLY aware of my personal situation and user name(s)). Actually, that topic has nothing to do with SEC or Auburn sports so I am still not understanding why you or the others think it is a topic worthy of this board. I am certain that topic is boring to the other posters on this board who are not obsessed with me and my posts.  It's not an obsession...it was a question. You attacked a poster by saying he had more than double the posts than  you...I basically said to add yours up from all of your user names and then give us a total.  You, as always, ignored it.

Now, so you are caught up to speed - I believe the moderators have already addressed this topic twice now. The first time is in this locked thread:  That's just addressing one of your many user names.  I wasn't saying you were wrong for having yet another name...just wanted to know how many you have used before so that we could get an accurate post count from you since you wanted to use someone else's post count against them.  We have to be fair, right?

 http://forums.scout.com/mb.asp...8912110&p=2

and the second time in this recent post:

http://forums.scout.com/mb.asp...7&t=8993327



So, if you or others continue to be obsesses with me and my posting which are not in any way directed at individuals (stalking) or personal in any way, I request that you take it up with the moderators. Not a moderator issue.  They have addressed the reason you have another name.  I just asked how many so that we could compare apples to apples.  You don't seem to want to play fair.

As far as discussion that involve the SEC, Auburn, and bama; I will continue to enjoy having those discussions with you and the other posters on this board who have some apparent obsession with me as long as they stay above the personal level. And, I have no problem at all with someone calling me out to back up my statements/opinions (and, if I am wrong, I will admit it), and I will call out others even though some on a message/discussion board have no desire to actually discuss (for some reason).  It's not an obessesion.  But the fact remains that you can't hide from your past.  You spent months and months harping about Saban not publicizing punishment but when it happens with AU, you accuse us of obssessing.  You aren't that important.  But we will continue to call you out on issues dealing with AU...especially if they are ones where you were critical of Alabama when the shoe was on the other foot. And BTW, you rarely ever admit when you are wrong but rather just move on and not address the topic anymore.

We can agree to disagree as other posters do on here daily without having to be called down by the moderators. So, I hope we can continue that same type interaction. This is neither an Auburn board nor a bama board, so it is an even playing field. And, I would love it if we would act that way with self control, not requiring moderation.   I'm not sure it's an even playing field, but that's fine.  We've had a 2 or 3 page discussion locked before but I've seen a 7 or 8 page Big 10 discussion that keeps going and going.  But it's their judgement.  But you can't also complain about 'name calling' if you start a post by calling someone "Sherlock." 

Tidefan1976 wrote:

General4AU wrote: Through all of these threads I have no clue what question you asked. If you want to repeat it or point it out and it is worth of answering, I will see what I can do. I don't normally not answer a question or give an opinion if it is warranted.

---------------------------------------------
--- Tidefan1976 wrote:

Been at least that long since I asked you a question and still no response. Man up.

Posted: 5/10/2012 9:48 PM

Re: The class that time forgot 

---

"What number user name are you on now anyway?"

Tidefan1976 wrote:

General4AU wrote:

As long as the moderators allow this thread to remain open with all the crap flowing into it, I will entertain you with answers to your rants.

- Look back to the post before I used the word "stalk." I was accused by bamafaninAuburn of stalking Alex. My point clearly was that Alex has more posts on this board than I do. If you add up the posts I have made on this board and compare that to the same time period for Alex, it is clear that he has many more on this board than I have with his countdowns, and nodding posts. And, if you don't believe that fact - I don't care. My point exactly.  Under your current name, maybe he has.  That's why I told you to total all of your posts under all of your names up and then compare.  Alex posts under one name.  You haven't.  It's not a fair comparison.  When you refused to do that, that's when I asked how many names you had so I could do it for you.  You still refuse to do that.  You just dance around things you don't want to answer until people move on.  You've done it under all of your names.

- So, you ask me a question in the first sentence of a paragraph and accusing me of dodging the question in the following sentence, and you can't understand why I was confused as to what you were accusing. It would appear that you are arguing just to argue. Nope...just can't understand how a grown man doesn't recognize a question when there is a perfectly normal question mark at the end of it.  Just another way to dance around something you don't want to answer.

- You need a better definition of the word attack. I am not going to help enlighten you. Once again, quit arguing for the sake of arguing. The point on post counts was to show that I am not following Alex around and posting every time he does. Furthermore, I don't copy his posts from this board to another board, which he has done to my posts on this board three times just this week. Go see BamaMag if you have not already.  Has nothing to do with you complaining about him using Aubs, which is clearly a shortened version of Auburn Fans.  In no way is Gump or Updyke the same.  You like to whine to the moderators but you don't play by the same rules.  My name isn't Sherlock and you know that.  Quit trying to hide behind your little jabs and stand up for once.

- It has been confirmed that I have had one user name that had problems, and the moderators were well aware of that. Beyond that, it is none of yours or any other poster on this board beyond that. I may have had a thousand, but as long as I am only using one on this board I am not in violation of this board’s rules. Again, if you want to do research, check the number of posts I have made on this board with this user name to the same time period for Alex, you will see that I have not matched him one-for-one. Which, clearly was my point. It was not an "attack" on his number of posts on this board. I don't care. He makes his posts to be seen and has no desire to discuss on a discussion board. Therefore, his agenda is clear to everyone.  Not the same.  You as a person have more posts here than Alex does.  That's the point.  You just aren't man enough to admit it.  That is my whole argument.
- Yes, it is a moderator issue. The moderators said leave it alone in a link I posted and told you, me, Alex, inAuburn, etc. to chill. Apparently, some of you did not get the message and continue with attacking, stalking, and trolling. So, the "we will continue" seems to me this is a coordinated effort by you and the other bama fans on this board. That is interesting and disturbing. The whole thing could have been avoided if you had just been honest instead of dodging the issue.  I don't have an issue with how many names you had.  The moderator cleared it up.  I just asked a question after you made an accusation that is, as always, false.

- Again, not sure what you are talking about with Saban and Auburn issues and punishment. As far as Auburn is concerned, I am not sure what has not been publicized and punished. If that is a topic you want to discuss, start another thread or just use the one that Alex started to bring out the arrest of T. Reed of Auburn.  Whatever.  You can hide from what you posted in the past because we know it doesn't exsist anymore, but if you were an honest person you would admit you have been critical about Saban not going public with players punishments but now that Chizik has done the same thing you are fine with it.

- You are kidding about "Sherlock." Do you even know who Sherlock would be? Apparently not. But, I thought you did with the comeback of "Watson." NEITHER of which are considered offensive by anyone, and it is clear that they are investigators. Again, go back to the moderators warning about people trying to be a detective - "maybe you guys should stop playing detective (bamafaninau)." Now, if I would have used the term "bammer" or "Updyke" (which I equate with the word "aub" as an attempted negative connotation), then I would have been rightfully called down for it.  You are a bit to sensative if you let the word Aub bother you.  That is pitiful.  Sherlock doesn't bother me but don't call me something other than my user name if you get offended by the same thing.

- The playing field being even was completely in reference to this not being an Auburn board or a bama board. So, as long as we can play nice, I think we can honestly discuss if we truly desire to do so. And, I actually consider you as one of those that do - except that you go on the attack quickly and spin excessively.  It's obvious that you just want this thread locked so you don't have to face up to your avoiding questions.  You will probably succeed but it doesn't mean you won't get called out on it again.

Tidefan1976 wrote:

General4AU wrote: Oh, I thought it was a legitimate question. When I looked back, I saw this series of statements from you:

"I bet if you added up the post count from all of your user names it would be much more impressive. By the way...are you saying that at AU if you don't play you don't get the training? That explains a lot..."  This was in response to a post that you just so happened to leave out...one where you accused someone of stalking you and said they had more than double the post count that you did.  That's when I told you to add yours up from all of your user names.  Let's not leave out things to try and make you look better, ok?

Here, there is no question about user names. So, when I saw this next post by you, it appeared that you were stating that you had asked a previous question I had not answered (which you did not - because I answered the QUESTION about training):  Try catching up and not just chiming in where you want to.

"Try me Watson. What number user name are you on now anyway? Oh...typical of you to dodge yet another question."

Above is a question and the accusation about a question in the same post. So, it is clear why there was some confusion on my part. In the future, if you are going to make accusation about dodging a question, then I suppose you should actually frame a question in a question format - the question mark can be assumed, but not the question itself.  Well, in this day in age, a question mark does, in fact, signify a question.  I thought you were able to pick up on that on your own, but looks as if I gave you too much credit.


Now, I will address that. First, I don't understand yours or others on this board obsession with user names. That actually is none of anyone's business other than the moderators on the boards in which I post - here and ITAT (and both are FULLY aware of my personal situation and user name(s)). Actually, that topic has nothing to do with SEC or Auburn sports so I am still not understanding why you or the others think it is a topic worthy of this board. I am certain that topic is boring to the other posters on this board who are not obsessed with me and my posts.  It's not an obsession...it was a question. You attacked a poster by saying he had more than double the posts than  you...I basically said to add yours up from all of your user names and then give us a total.  You, as always, ignored it.

Now, so you are caught up to speed - I believe the moderators have already addressed this topic twice now. The first time is in this locked thread:  That's just addressing one of your many user names.  I wasn't saying you were wrong for having yet another name...just wanted to know how many you have used before so that we could get an accurate post count from you since you wanted to use someone else's post count against them.  We have to be fair, right?

 http://forums.scout.com/mb.asp...8912110&p=2

and the second time in this recent post:

http://forums.scout.com/mb.asp...7&t=8993327



So, if you or others continue to be obsesses with me and my posting which are not in any way directed at individuals (stalking) or personal in any way, I request that you take it up with the moderators. Not a moderator issue.  They have addressed the reason you have another name.  I just asked how many so that we could compare apples to apples.  You don't seem to want to play fair.

As far as discussion that involve the SEC, Auburn, and bama; I will continue to enjoy having those discussions with you and the other posters on this board who have some apparent obsession with me as long as they stay above the personal level. And, I have no problem at all with someone calling me out to back up my statements/opinions (and, if I am wrong, I will admit it), and I will call out others even though some on a message/discussion board have no desire to actually discuss (for some reason).  It's not an obessesion.  But the fact remains that you can't hide from your past.  You spent months and months harping about Saban not publicizing punishment but when it happens with AU, you accuse us of obssessing.  You aren't that important.  But we will continue to call you out on issues dealing with AU...especially if they are ones where you were critical of Alabama when the shoe was on the other foot. And BTW, you rarely ever admit when you are wrong but rather just move on and not address the topic anymore.

We can agree to disagree as other posters do on here daily without having to be called down by the moderators. So, I hope we can continue that same type interaction. This is neither an Auburn board nor a bama board, so it is an even playing field. And, I would love it if we would act that way with self control, not requiring moderation.   I'm not sure it's an even playing field, but that's fine.  We've had a 2 or 3 page discussion locked before but I've seen a 7 or 8 page Big 10 discussion that keeps going and going.  But it's their judgement.  But you can't also complain about 'name calling' if you start a post by calling someone "Sherlock." 

Tidefan1976 wrote:

General4AU wrote: Through all of these threads I have no clue what question you asked. If you want to repeat it or point it out and it is worth of answering, I will see what I can do. I don't normally not answer a question or give an opinion if it is warranted.

---------------------------------------------
--- Tidefan1976 wrote:

Been at least that long since I asked you a question and still no response. Man up.

Posted: 5/10/2012 9:48 PM

Re: The class that time forgot 

---

"What number user name are you on now anyway?"

Interesting, what is the source that PJH used? It looks like something pulled from StatTiger on the Auburn board that he posted yesterday at 12:56pm, but I could be wrong.

http://auburn.scout.com/2/1196298.html

By the way, in StatTiger's article, he does not mention the word young in it at all (except when he writes a player's name - Oscar Young). He also predicted AL and LSU to go 10-2 (6-2) and UA and Auburn to go 9-3 (5-3).

Another interesting stat from the StatTiger article is this:
Players signed in last 4 classes rated as 4 stars or better -

AL 65
LSU 49
Auburn 48
aTm 22

UA 18
MSU 18

Ole Miss 18

He does a great job with the information he provides - especially stats.

 

bamafaninauburn wrote:

pjhBAMA 'Bama Veteran 2647 posts this site Ignore this Member Send Private Message

Nominate | Report Posted: Yesterday 2:34 PM The "Young" Argument....  ... that au likes to use just doesn't hold water according to the numbers. For example, let's compare Alabama, LSU, Arkansas, and AU for this upcoming season (2012). We will look at returning starters, returning letterman, returning players with 20+ games of experience, and number of seniors.  Alabama Returning Starters: 13 Returning Letterman: 41 Returning w/ 20+ Games: 23 Number of Seniors: 16 LSU Returning Starters: 14 Returning Letterman: 43 Returning w/ 20+ Games: 29 Number of Seniors: 13 Arkansas Returning Starters: 15 Returning Letterman: 49 Returning w/ 20+ Games: 24 Number of Seniors: 14 AU Returning Starters: 18 Returning Letterman: 48 Returning w/ 20+ Games: 24 Number of Seniors: 12

bamafaninauburn wrote:
 So now that StatTiger doesn't think Auburn is young, you don't either?  And you know the link is no good for a good majority here as your Mods are quick with the banning of rival fans (as some other boards are too)

Just because other teams are young, doesn't effect youth of Auburn.  The two aren't mutually exclusive.  Are we not as young as last year?  Of course.  Is youth and inexperience at certain positions still a major factor in our probable success?  Yes.  Are we still in need of another year of maturation (or 'young') before being a true contender?  Yes.
Not sure why our lack of upperclassmen or experience over the years has vexed our cousins to the west so.

ChiefSaugahatchee wrote:

Just because other teams are young, doesn't effect youth of Auburn.  The two aren't mutually exclusive.  Are we not as young as last year?  Of course.  Is youth and inexperience at certain positions still a major factor in our probable success?  Yes.  Are we still in need of another year of maturation (or 'young') before being a true contender?  Yes.
Not sure why our lack of upperclassmen or experience over the years has vexed our cousins to the west so.