99blackcobra wrote:
3. Hawg/kwyoung .... If you didn't know any better you would think their team has actually won something recently .

DJSdawg wrote: Homers dont have opinions based on relevant and fair facts, thus leaving me out

99blackcobra wrote:
3. Hawg/kwyoung .... If you didn't know any better you would think their team has actually won something recently .

kwyoung wrote: Basically anyone who will take the time to argue against 99 is a homer

---------------------------------------------
--- AustinBengal wrote:

99blackcobra wrote:
3. Hawg/kwyoung .... If you didn't know any better you would think their team has actually won something recently .

Just because Hawg uses facts to refute some of your statements doesn't make him a homer.
He's one of the most objective posters on here.
He is defensive if someone is making unfounded statements about Arky and he does like the term "helmet" a little too much.  But, overall, dude is objective.

---------------------------------------------

Volfan4ya wrote:

DJSdawg wrote: Homers dont have opinions based on relevant and fair facts, thus leaving me out

....sure they do DJ, even Smoke and Crunch can quote stats and 'facts".....cmon man, Ive rarely seen you post anything negative about the Dawgs....

DJSdawg wrote:

Volfan4ya wrote:

DJSdawg wrote: Homers dont have opinions based on relevant and fair facts, thus leaving me out

....sure they do DJ, even Smoke and Crunch can quote stats and 'facts".....cmon man, Ive rarely seen you post anything negative about the Dawgs....

You are a bit misinformed. Sure, anyone can do that, but not everyone does, in particular crunch.  My opinion is based on objective, relevant and fair facts rather than hatred (smoke) / love (crunch) of a school. 

If you dont think I have posted anything negative about the dawgs, you simply dont read every post of mine. Just this offseason, I pointed out how awful UGA was at giving up non-D points, and I also pointed out how our D needs to improve its ability to finish off a good team.

When someone says something about my team, I will look the facts up to see if its accurate:

- If a negative statement is proven to be true, I accept that reality.
- If the negative statement is proven to be incorrect, that doesnt make me a homer, it makes the other person wrong.

Volfan4ya wrote: Im sorry....I had to laugh. All 3 of my nominees posted replies denying they are the most homeristic of posters. I say lets see who else weighs in....

smokeyone wrote:

1. If a coach or player leaves its addition by subtraction.
2 .If a stat doesnt confirm your opinion discredit it and find one that does.
3. If you are wrong on a point change the discussion to suit your opinion.
4. If your team every faced a remotely similar situation and it worked out ok it is always exactly like that, anytime it didnt work out you should push the time it did.
5. If your teams players do not reach established benchmarks for stats its unrealitic so just compare it to the average,
6. for titles they are all luck even if everyone else in the big 6 has atleast 1.
7. If asked to give an opinion always post an opinion in line with yours from another source other than you.
8. Never make predictions as they are reminders that you are a homer.

OrangeAfroMan wrote: I love how Crunch criticized our midget RBs at ever turn, and now that they're gone, NOW our offense will be terrible. This year we'll have 200+ lb RBs carrying the ball, all of which were 4 or 5-star recruits, but we'll have the worst offense ever because our midget RBs are gone.

I don't know of a word that means 'severe hypocrite', but that's what Crunch is.

crunchimusmaximus wrote:

OrangeAfroMan wrote: I love how Crunch criticized our midget RBs at ever turn, and now that they're gone, NOW our offense will be terrible. This year we'll have 200+ lb RBs carrying the ball, all of which were 4 or 5-star recruits, but we'll have the worst offense ever because our midget RBs are gone.

I don't know of a word that means 'severe hypocrite', but that's what Crunch is.

When one of your new guys proves to be a workhorse back, I will be worried. Don't blast me for talking up Marlin Lane, our next great back, when you are doing the same for your backs who haven't even played as many downs as him.

Point is, everyone knew Demps or Rainey had the ability to to take it to the house every time they touched the ball. It seems like UF has ALWAYS had at least a few guys like that on offense every year since Spurrier arrived.......this is the first time in a long time there are no proven commodities.

I would still take a good workhorse back and a solid number 2 over 2 scatback guys like that in my style of offense...but that doesn't mean they didn't annoy the hell out of me when we play ed against guys like that.

drewactual wrote:

1. we're all a bunch of dang homers.. there ain't nuthin' wrong with that... it's when objectivity is lost things get frustrating.. that happens often around here.. and it's part of this joints charm..

2. I've no clue why you guys dislike Crunch so much.. his passion is admirable, and his lack of objectivity is entertaining.. we all know he's out to lunch on his expectations, and I venture a guess even he knows..

3. I could go on and on with the reason stats suck.. they are simply, in short- an effort to quantify a teams ability, but are so subjective and contingent on variables that it will never ever accomplish such.. anytime somebody starts tossing stats as defense of their opinion, I hold that argument suspect..

4. you gotta watch the games to truly know what happened- and take ALL factors into consideration when sizing up a team..

5. it's the ones who are ACTUALLY in their own little world that are annoying.. those who pull stats out of context,

6. or pull what I charged my ex wife with: savage tactics.. (sah-vig tak-ticks; picking a fight using the art of fluidly transitioning from specifics to general topics while maintaining the appearance of neutrality, in effort to trick an adversary into taking a stance on something not defensible, or worse, defining, without consent, the adversaries supposed position/stance..) There are a bunch of you guys who do this.. Some of you have made it to endearing, some haven't left the realm of silly, and yet a few more are bonifide pricks because of using this little ploy over and over..