CubColtPacer

That's a very good point-I'm off to look for that stat now to see what it holds. I'm calculating the numbers for the QB's because I can't get the stat anywhere: Average Y/C (2006) Mcnabb: 14.7 Romo: 13.19 Bledsoe: 12.93 Warner: 12.75 Huard: 12.69 Big Ben: 12.55 Palmer: 12.45 Brees: 12.41 Cutler: 12.36 Grossman: 12.18 Peyton Manning: 12.15 Vick: 12.12 Grossman is up there-there are some interesting names on that list, that's for sure.

your strange and pointless micro-analysis does little to shed light on the issue, here. I think the reason that most QB's don't have a performace jump in their 5th year is clear and it doesn't apply to Grossman. By the 4th year, most QB's have played enough games to see what they have to offer and most development will probably have occured by then. Not the case with Grossman. That's why I tried to show a page ago about QB's who came in during their 3rd season or so for the first time. Those QB's had more success then either Grossman or a QB who starts from his rookie year. All I'm saying is that Grossman is behind the curve. He doesn't have the same amount of success that normally a player who is just starting for the first time in his 3rd or 4th season usually does. That certainly could be because of his injuries though. As I said also, one of the reasons that I'm skeptical of Grossman's development is completion percentage. Here are the QB's with under 57 percent completion percentage since 2002: 2002: Blake, Vick, Brooks, Plummer, Carr, Matthews, Ramsey, Hutchinson, Harrington 2003: Collins, Blake, Carr, Johnson, Harrington, Gannon, Ramsey, Boller, Stewart 2004: Bledsoe, Vick, Collins, Harrington, Boller, Dorsey, Feeley, Brunell 2005: Bollinger, Brooks, Collins, Eli Manning, Ferotte, Orton, Losman 2006: Leinhart, Hasselbeck, Favre, Plummer, Grossman, Gradkowski, Walter, Vick, Young There are some good names on this list that were good prospects. In 2002, Brooks was in his 3rd year and having a good year except for a bad completion percentage. Carr, Ramsey, and Harrington were in their rookie years. 2003-the 3 rookies appear again, and Boller is a rookie. 2004-Feeley is being developed in this year, along with Harrington, Boller, and Vick 2005-Eli appears, along with Losman, who only threw 228 passes that year. 2006-Leinhart and Grossman appear in their first year starting. There's one big thing on this list-nobody who started out with such a bad completion percentage is developing, with the possible exception of Losman (who was only in for a few games the year he made the list). Brooks, Carr, Ramsey, Harrington, Boller, Feeley, Eli, Vick-all supposed to be great QB's, none could improve their completion percentages. It's not easy to do, which is why you see very few here who appear on this list and then develop. That's the other big reason why Grossman is in trouble unless he can break the mold. Why just take those few years? That's hardly a signifigant sample size. In any event, many QB's have had poor completion % and have improved them over the course of their careers. Matt Hassleback had a 54.8 completion % in his first year starting. Alex Smith had a 50% completion % in his first year and a 58.1% this year. Quite an improvement. McNabb had a 58% and a 57% in his first 2 years starting. Delhomme had a 59.2% his first year with the Panthers and a 58.2 the next year. He had a 61% last year. Drew Bledsoe had a 49.9% in his first year starting. Troy Aikman 52.9% and a 56%, before posting a 65.3% in his third year. Carr went from 52.5% to 56% the 61% and has improved to a 68% this year Trent Green had a 54.6% his first year a 60% his second year and a 56% his third year Jesus man, even Peyton Manning had a 56.7 completion % his first year starting. Do I need to keep going? What tend does Grossman have to buck here exactly? Most of their QB's were actual rookies-those numbers have to be taken with a grain of salt. Mcnabb's completion percentage is actually still quite low, but he makes up for it with his deep passes and by running the ball well. Those are some good numbers though, and some good examples of QB's who broke through-I just went with the info I had in front of me.

Exactly. CubColtPacer, the point you're ignoring in saying that most QBs don't make a jump in their 5th season is that Rex hasn't been on the field as much as any of these QBs. If you look at starts or games played, Rex is exactly where he should be and has a great chance of progressing and developing further. I don't believe that's true-I think he's behind other QB's who have gone into years 3 and 4 with few professional starts, and I tried to show that with the stats of their first full years a page or two ago. I do understand though the dead horse argument though, so I'll try to find the stat I'm looking for and not keep hitting the same point over and over :D

That's a very good point-I'm off to look for that stat now to see what it holds.

your strange and pointless micro-analysis does little to shed light on the issue, here. I think the reason that most QB's don't have a performace jump in their 5th year is clear and it doesn't apply to Grossman. By the 4th year, most QB's have played enough games to see what they have to offer and most development will probably have occured by then. Not the case with Grossman. That's why I tried to show a page ago about QB's who came in during their 3rd season or so for the first time. Those QB's had more success then either Grossman or a QB who starts from his rookie year. All I'm saying is that Grossman is behind the curve. He doesn't have the same amount of success that normally a player who is just starting for the first time in his 3rd or 4th season usually does. That certainly could be because of his injuries though. As I said also, one of the reasons that I'm skeptical of Grossman's development is completion percentage. Here are the QB's with under 57 percent completion percentage since 2002: 2002: Blake, Vick, Brooks, Plummer, Carr, Matthews, Ramsey, Hutchinson, Harrington 2003: Collins, Blake, Carr, Johnson, Harrington, Gannon, Ramsey, Boller, Stewart 2004: Bledsoe, Vick, Collins, Harrington, Boller, Dorsey, Feeley, Brunell 2005: Bollinger, Brooks, Collins, Eli Manning, Ferotte, Orton, Losman 2006: Leinhart, Hasselbeck, Favre, Plummer, Grossman, Gradkowski, Walter, Vick, Young There are some good names on this list that were good prospects. In 2002, Brooks was in his 3rd year and having a good year except for a bad completion percentage. Carr, Ramsey, and Harrington were in their rookie years. 2003-the 3 rookies appear again, and Boller is a rookie. 2004-Feeley is being developed in this year, along with Harrington, Boller, and Vick 2005-Eli appears, along with Losman, who only threw 228 passes that year. 2006-Leinhart and Grossman appear in their first year starting. There's one big thing on this list-nobody who started out with such a bad completion percentage is developing, with the possible exception of Losman (who was only in for a few games the year he made the list). Brooks, Carr, Ramsey, Harrington, Boller, Feeley, Eli, Vick-all supposed to be great QB's, none could improve their completion percentages. It's not easy to do, which is why you see very few here who appear on this list and then develop. That's the other big reason why Grossman is in trouble unless he can break the mold.

he's on par with those QB's, all of whom except losman have played in a pro-bowl or will do so soon. that's what your stats show. or mcnair? (whom i don't see how he's not anywhere close to) but i won't do anything of the sort until you address the point that grossman couldn't rely on 1 or 2 receivers and had to spread the ball around. i'd bet that his top 2 recievers had a lesser percentage of his total yardage than any of those other QBs. that's not exactly the "best situation". Well, first for McNair, one has to put the almost 700 yards rushing and 8 TD's into the equation-that changes it significantly, which is why I give McNair the edge there. Several other of these QB's had to spread the ball around as well-I'll use the Chargers for example-they spread the ball around about as much as the Bears did this year. Top 2 receivers statistically for the Bears: 51.3% of Grossman's yards Top 2 for the Chargers: 46.7% of Rivers yards That's the first one I looked up, so there definitely could be more. i think the bears should cut rex for not having the best offensive player in the game lining up behind him. Tomlinson's both a great thing and a bad thing for Rivers-he gets plenty of yardage for him, but he also took a lot of the easy TD's away from Rivers-many more than the Bears RB's did. now you're just reaching. I don't have to reach-Rivers had much better numbers. You were reaching that it was because of Tomlinson that he did have it when I pointed out there were both positives and negatives to that. Grossman had a hot start to the season-the opponents mostly adjusted to take away the bomb, and Grossman simply has not proven that he can keep from turning the ball over conistently against a defense that is preventing the bomb. He has had a few good games since then with many bad. As I said, since week 5 he has had 13 TDs and turned the ball over 27 times. Can he develop into throwing the short pass consistantly ? I hope so, but history says that I should be skeptical of that. nobody is arguing that rex had a great year. but arguing that he cannot develop is the dumbest thing i've ever heard. maybe i just don't understand the parallels you are making, other than pointing out that he appears similar to many other young QB's at his stage of development what are you trying to say, either apparentky or inadvertantly? how does history say that you should "be skeptical of that"? All I'm saying is that it is very rare for a QB to develop into a good QB in year 5 or later. By the end of 4 years, if that QB has played all 4 years or sat on the bench for 1, 2, or 3 of those years-at the end of the 4th year it is known if the QB will develop or not. Maybe with Rex's injury history that will give him to the end of year 5-maybe. It's also possible that some QB's are simply given up on too soon. It's just true that it's not likely that a QB will suddenly break through so late into their career (yes, just 4 years in that sounds strange, but it's true), no matter how many years experience they have actually playing. It's happened to a few, but for most it doesn't.

he's on par with those QB's, all of whom except losman have played in a pro-bowl or will do so soon. that's what your stats show. or mcnair? (whom i don't see how he's not anywhere close to) but i won't do anything of the sort until you address the point that grossman couldn't rely on 1 or 2 receivers and had to spread the ball around. i'd bet that his top 2 recievers had a lesser percentage of his total yardage than any of those other QBs. that's not exactly the "best situation". Well, first for McNair, one has to put the almost 700 yards rushing and 8 TD's into the equation-that changes it significantly, which is why I give McNair the edge there. Several other of these QB's had to spread the ball around as well-I'll use the Chargers for example-they spread the ball around about as much as the Bears did this year. Top 2 receivers statistically for the Bears: 51.3% of Grossman's yards Top 2 for the Chargers: 46.7% of Rivers yards That's the first one I looked up, so there definitely could be more. i think the bears should cut rex for not having the best offensive player in the game lining up behind him. Tomlinson's both a great thing and a bad thing for Rivers-he gets plenty of yardage for him, but he also took a lot of the easy TD's away from Rivers-many more than the Bears RB's did. now you're just reaching. I don't have to reach-Rivers had much better numbers. You were reaching that it was because of Tomlinson that he did have it when I pointed out there were both positives and negatives to that. Grossman had a hot start to the season-the opponents mostly adjusted to take away the bomb, and Grossman simply has not proven that he can keep from turning the ball over conistently against a defense that is preventing the bomb. He has had a few good games since then with many bad. As I said, since week 5 he has had 13 TDs and turned the ball over 27 times. Can he develop into throwing the short pass consistantly ? I hope so, but history says that I should be skeptical of that.

If that were all a QB had to do, that would be great. What is most troubling to me about Grossman's progression though are his splits. Since week 5, including the playoffs, Grossman has thrown 13 TDs, tossed 20 INTS, and lost 7 fumbles. 27 TO's in 14 games with a 51% completion percentage-he has to figure out a way to halve that number of TO's and greatly raise his completion percentage, and he doesn't have much time to do it left entering his 5th year. He certainly might develop, but NFL history doesn't give him that much chance-I hope for all of your sakes that Grossman is an exception to the rule.

Yup-although I believe that Carr sat back and let Ron Dayne do the work for him that day:D. That was definitely the low point of the season for Colts fans-many fans even started calling for Dungy's head at that point.

he's on par with those QB's, all of whom except losman have played in a pro-bowl or will do so soon. that's what your stats show. or mcnair? (whom i don't see how he's not anywhere close to) but i won't do anything of the sort until you address the point that grossman couldn't rely on 1 or 2 receivers and had to spread the ball around. i'd bet that his top 2 recievers had a lesser percentage of his total yardage than any of those other QBs. that's not exactly the "best situation". Well, first for McNair, one has to put the almost 700 yards rushing and 8 TD's into the equation-that changes it significantly, which is why I give McNair the edge there. Several other of these QB's had to spread the ball around as well-I'll use the Chargers for example-they spread the ball around about as much as the Bears did this year. Top 2 receivers statistically for the Bears: 51.3% of Grossman's yards Top 2 for the Chargers: 46.7% of Rivers yards That's the first one I looked up, so there definitely could be more. i think the bears should cut rex for not having the best offensive player in the game lining up behind him. Tomlinson's both a great thing and a bad thing for Rivers-he gets plenty of yardage for him, but he also took a lot of the easy TD's away from Rivers-many more than the Bears RB's did.

he's on par with those QB's, all of whom except losman have played in a pro-bowl or will do so soon. that's what your stats show. or mcnair? (whom i don't see how he's not anywhere close to) but i won't do anything of the sort until you address the point that grossman couldn't rely on 1 or 2 receivers and had to spread the ball around. i'd bet that his top 2 recievers had a lesser percentage of his total yardage than any of those other QBs. that's not exactly the "best situation". Well, first for McNair, one has to put the almost 700 yards rushing and 8 TD's into the equation-that changes it significantly, which is why I give McNair the edge there. Several other of these QB's had to spread the ball around as well-I'll use the Chargers for example-they spread the ball around about as much as the Bears did this year. Top 2 receivers statistically for the Bears: 51.3% of Grossman's yards Top 2 for the Chargers: 46.7% of Rivers yards That's the first one I looked up, so there definitely could be more.

Considering that Garcia has had 1 season out of 8 where he played worse than Rex this year (and that year he only played 6 games behind one of the worst offensive lines I've seen with a huge deficit most of the time-otherwise known as the Lions :D )-I'm not sure how you can make such a definitive claim. Grossman is far more likely to improve than Garcia. Garcia is a bond while Grossman is a stock. IMO the Bears need a bond type QB with that defense. while completely depreciating the stock when it could become the centerpiece of their portfolio? That's the key Sully, know when to sell and know when to keep it. I would invest on a different stock myself if a stock is what is wanted/needed. so, instead of keeping in my mind what other good stocks have been in the beginning the bears should just panic and sell after the stock has performed reasonably well in it's first full year? For being not a rookie when he started, Grossman was really bad in his first full year. Most QB's who come in their second or third year do better than Grossman's performance this year-he's already behind the curve a little bit. name some of them for me. and for the sake of your argument, leave out the great ones. I'm just going to put all the QB's stats that started after their first year that was also a starter this year: (there aren't all that many of them I do believe): Tony Romo: 65.3%, 2903 yards, 8.6 Y/A, 19TD/13INT, Rush: 102 Garcia: 60.0, 2544 yards, 6.8 Y/A, 11TD/11INT, Rush: 221, 2 TD Pennington: 68.9%, 3120 yards, 7.8 Y/A, 22TD/6INT, Rush: 49, 1 TD McNair: 52%, 2665 yards, 6.4 Y/A, 14TD/13INT, Rush: 674, 8 TD Bulger: 63.2%, 3845 yards, 7.2 Y/A, 22TD/22INT, Rush: 75, 4 TD Losman: 62.5%, 3051 yards, 7.1 Y/A, 19TD/14INT, Rush: 140, 1 TD Rivers: 61.7%, 3388 yards, 7.4 Y/A, 22TD/9INT, Rush: 49 Ok, I'm going to stop there-there were more than I thought for sure! There are still a few more, including Brady, Delhomme, and others, but this should give us a good list. Here's Grossman: 54.6%, 3193 yards, 6.7 Y/A, 23TD/20INT, Rush: 2 His passing stats line up fine with McNair, but McNair as seen by the rushing yards was primarily a rushing QB. Grossman is definitely behind in his first year, especially in completion percentage. looks like he threw more TDs than any of those guys, actually. so the only real stat you're looking for is completion percentage? if grossman had the recivers that those guys did he might be around that percentage. wow, he threw less interceptions and more touchdowns than bulger? with those receivers? that's impressive. i just don't see how he doesn't stack up to those guys.--especially since rex spread the ball around to many different players and didn't rely on one or 2 great ones. btw- brady's lucky he got a chance with the patriots and delhomme was thought so highly of after being given the starting job in new orleans that he was cut and ended up in NFL europe (in short, he developed), so probably not a good comparison. your research doesn't really support your hypothesis, except the fact that rex needs to improve his completion percentage, and he will. Completion percentage is a huge stat because completions move the chains, something the Bears had trouble doing this year even with a good running game (22nd in the NFL). Y/A is another key stat-in fact, Football Outsiders (who breaks the stats down better than anyone) has it as the most important stat for QB's, and Rex is definitely behind most of those QB's. Also, you have to remember that Grossman got put into the best situation of any of those QB's-the Chicago defense gave him a short field to throw TD's on a routine basis. With that said, his numbers should be better then those QB's-and they are worse to any QB on that list. Pick out a QB, and tell me how Grossman had a better season than them-the only one you could even come close is Garcia.

He's actually the opposite of Neifi. Well, they both can't hit but I thought Hill was a pretty good OBP guy that could steal some bases. Yeah-Hill is more like a slightly worse version of Theriot without Theriot's power explosion he had in the majors last year.

Considering that Garcia has had 1 season out of 8 where he played worse than Rex this year (and that year he only played 6 games behind one of the worst offensive lines I've seen with a huge deficit most of the time-otherwise known as the Lions :D )-I'm not sure how you can make such a definitive claim. Grossman is far more likely to improve than Garcia. Garcia is a bond while Grossman is a stock. IMO the Bears need a bond type QB with that defense. while completely depreciating the stock when it could become the centerpiece of their portfolio? That's the key Sully, know when to sell and know when to keep it. I would invest on a different stock myself if a stock is what is wanted/needed. so, instead of keeping in my mind what other good stocks have been in the beginning the bears should just panic and sell after the stock has performed reasonably well in it's first full year? For being not a rookie when he started, Grossman was really bad in his first full year. Most QB's who come in their second or third year do better than Grossman's performance this year-he's already behind the curve a little bit. name some of them for me. and for the sake of your argument, leave out the great ones. I'm just going to put all the QB's stats that started after their first year that was also a starter this year: (there aren't all that many of them I do believe): Tony Romo: 65.3%, 2903 yards, 8.6 Y/A, 19TD/13INT, Rush: 102 Garcia: 60.0, 2544 yards, 6.8 Y/A, 11TD/11INT, Rush: 221, 2 TD Pennington: 68.9%, 3120 yards, 7.8 Y/A, 22TD/6INT, Rush: 49, 1 TD McNair: 52%, 2665 yards, 6.4 Y/A, 14TD/13INT, Rush: 674, 8 TD Bulger: 63.2%, 3845 yards, 7.2 Y/A, 22TD/22INT, Rush: 75, 4 TD Losman: 62.5%, 3051 yards, 7.1 Y/A, 19TD/14INT, Rush: 140, 1 TD Rivers: 61.7%, 3388 yards, 7.4 Y/A, 22TD/9INT, Rush: 49 Ok, I'm going to stop there-there were more than I thought for sure! There are still a few more, including Brady, Delhomme, and others, but this should give us a good list. Here's Grossman: 54.6%, 3193 yards, 6.7 Y/A, 23TD/20INT, Rush: 2 His passing stats line up fine with McNair, but McNair as seen by the rushing yards was primarily a rushing QB. Grossman is definitely behind in his first year, especially in completion percentage.

Considering that Garcia has had 1 season out of 8 where he played worse than Rex this year (and that year he only played 6 games behind one of the worst offensive lines I've seen with a huge deficit most of the time-otherwise known as the Lions :D )-I'm not sure how you can make such a definitive claim. Grossman is far more likely to improve than Garcia. Garcia is a bond while Grossman is a stock. IMO the Bears need a bond type QB with that defense. while completely depreciating the stock when it could become the centerpiece of their portfolio? That's the key Sully, know when to sell and know when to keep it. I would invest on a different stock myself if a stock is what is wanted/needed. so, instead of keeping in my mind what other good stocks have been in the beginning the bears should just panic and sell after the stock has performed reasonably well in it's first full year? For being not a rookie when he started, Grossman was really bad in his first full year. Most QB's who come in their second or third year do better than Grossman's performance this year-he's already behind the curve a little bit.

Considering that Garcia has had 1 season out of 8 where he played worse than Rex this year (and that year he only played 6 games behind one of the worst offensive lines I've seen with a huge deficit most of the time-otherwise known as the Lions :D )-I'm not sure how you can make such a definitive claim. Grossman is far more likely to improve than Garcia. That's true-of course, that's also a big gamble to bet on his improvement IMO. why would it be a gamble? why are some people acting like a QB should just be a plug and play right out of the box? again, the drew brees example should speak to everyone. rex is a similar height with a much better arm. How long are you willing to wait? Sure, this is his first full season-but it is also his 4th season overall. Maybe Grossman will develop later than most QB's because of his injuries, but his injuries also have to be factored in as possible problems. Most QB's though have either developed or not by the end of their 4th year-the other 3 QB's futures have basically been decided in their current cities that were drafted at the same time as Rex (Palmer-yes, Leftwich and Boller-no). The other thing that worries me about Rex developing is his completion percentage-it's in the range of QB's who only survive because of their legs. He would have to improve that by 6 percent or so to be a good NFL QB, and that's going to be hard for him to do.

Considering that Garcia has had 1 season out of 8 where he played worse than Rex this year (and that year he only played 6 games behind one of the worst offensive lines I've seen with a huge deficit most of the time-otherwise known as the Lions :D )-I'm not sure how you can make such a definitive claim. again, garcia is 37-years old. no thanks. grossman just had the 2nd best year in bears history. relatively speaking, beras fans should be begging for more grossman. To be honest, that's like saying that the Cubs need more Dusty Baker because he gave them back to back winning seasons for the first time in 40 years-it still wasn't very good.

Considering that Garcia has had 1 season out of 8 where he played worse than Rex this year (and that year he only played 6 games behind one of the worst offensive lines I've seen with a huge deficit most of the time-otherwise known as the Lions :D )-I'm not sure how you can make such a definitive claim. Grossman is far more likely to improve than Garcia. That's true-of course, that's also a big gamble to bet on his improvement IMO.

Considering that Garcia has had 1 season out of 8 where he played worse than Rex this year (and that year he only played 6 games behind one of the worst offensive lines I've seen with a huge deficit most of the time-otherwise known as the Lions :D )-I'm not sure how you can make such a definitive claim.

Who are you playing? Well, I'll answer for Cuse here-they play Illinois and Iowa-Illinois at home and Iowa on the road.

what a d-bag. That sounds awfully hollow after ND just took two recruits who had previously committed to Iowa and Louisville. Different situations. The Iowa recruit consisted pretty much of ND offering and him changing his mind due to the offer. The Louisville recruit was a coaching change, i.e. the coaching change that cost ND a bunch of recruits in 2004-05. However, ND's far from innocent of this. There's a Washington Post article today in which former QB coach Peter Vaas was pursuing Arrelious Benn pretty aggressively after he was committed to Illinois. Funny how it's almost always a different situation when ND is involved. Smith had been committed for almost 6 months and taken multiple visits. He helped recruit others to Iowa. The point is Charlie puts on a face for the cameras that he's all about committment and being honorable about them. He's upset that someone would back out of a committment to him. Yet he has no dilemna's when it comes to trying to snatch away commits from other schools, the very week before signing day. What a man of principle. I don't think many if any in the ND fanbase would consider Weis a "true man of principle". He is from the Belicheck school, that is for sure-and unfortunately, that means they cut certain corners to win. I think he is a great coach, but I'm not sure I like the man. Oh no, what did they do hire a bunch of guys as assistant coaches who are friends with a previously committed to another school's recruit? Now that would be a corner cut. You mean hiring a qualified assistant who happens to know the primary area to recruit very well, and so would be a big help to the program's stated desire (and the fanbase's biggest wish) to get in-state recruiting back to what it used to be? I was very happy with the hire, and didn't even know he was friends with that particular recruit until weeks later. Oh can't you read? I mean it was all over the news that he was best friends with IDKWTI's daddy? All of these coaches cut corners. Some are just better at it. I wish it were a level playing field. Yes, I can read-it probably just wasn't reported on the immediate hiring news, and being an Illinois fan, you didn't pay attention to an Indiana assistant coach being hired (why should you?) until the friendship came out.

what a d-bag. That sounds awfully hollow after ND just took two recruits who had previously committed to Iowa and Louisville. Different situations. The Iowa recruit consisted pretty much of ND offering and him changing his mind due to the offer. The Louisville recruit was a coaching change, i.e. the coaching change that cost ND a bunch of recruits in 2004-05. However, ND's far from innocent of this. There's a Washington Post article today in which former QB coach Peter Vaas was pursuing Arrelious Benn pretty aggressively after he was committed to Illinois. Funny how it's almost always a different situation when ND is involved. Smith had been committed for almost 6 months and taken multiple visits. He helped recruit others to Iowa. The point is Charlie puts on a face for the cameras that he's all about committment and being honorable about them. He's upset that someone would back out of a committment to him. Yet he has no dilemna's when it comes to trying to snatch away commits from other schools, the very week before signing day. What a man of principle. I don't think many if any in the ND fanbase would consider Weis a "true man of principle". He is from the Belicheck school, that is for sure-and unfortunately, that means they cut certain corners to win. I think he is a great coach, but I'm not sure I like the man. Oh no, what did they do hire a bunch of guys as assistant coaches who are friends with a previously committed to another school's recruit? Now that would be a corner cut. You mean hiring a qualified assistant who happens to know the primary area to recruit very well, and so would be a big help to the program's stated desire (and the fanbase's biggest wish) to get in-state recruiting back to what it used to be? I was very happy with the hire, and didn't even know he was friends with that particular recruit until weeks later.

I'd like to say that I completely approve of all of that. I'd like to say it's totally classless... so is hiring a lowlife like thuggins to lead a basketball program. When you hire someone like him, people are going to make jokes about it. LMAO! Like he's any more of a low life than half of the coaches out there. Give me a break. So, the guy got a DUI? So did I years ago, but does that make me a lowlife? It's all preception, but it's very classless of a university newspaper to print something like that. KU cheats and is sanctioned by the NCAA for it, but Huggins is a lowlife... hahahaha! Pot- Kettle! While there are plenty of coaches out there who have made a mistake or two, I'm not sure how many are out there that have the long record Huggins has. 1. His players get arrested many, many times during his tenure, some for serious charges. 2. He gets the school put on decently serious probation for a "lack of institutional control" of the program. 3. His graduation rates were awful. 4. The DUI That doesn't even mention the coaching fact that his teams under-achieved in Marchh consistently, which of course didn't make him popular to Cincy fans who could get past everything else. I don't think he's a terrible hire for a program wanting to go on the way up. However, he has had some sort of controversy around him for the last 15 years, and because of that his reputation is probably the second worst in the country behind Knight. Like I said, some coaches have made some of those mistakes, but not many had such little control of their program as Huggins did in Cincy.

I call that smart coaching. That's why the Devils clutched and grabbed their way to three Stanley Cup titles. If the game isn't being called the way it's supposed to be called, you use that to your advantage. I'm not saying you play dirty and try to hurt other people, but if it involves committing pass interference that the refs aren't calling - that's what you should do. I never said it wasn't smart coaching, but can you imagine coaches like Dungy or any of his tree telling their players to purposely break the rules because the refs aren't calling it? That was my original point-BB is a great coach who wins a great amount of the time, just like Weis. To do that, they are willing to cut a few corners from time to time, including stretching the rules as far as they can go from time to time. Based on what they do on the field occasionally and even more what they have done off the field (BB especially is famous for his violations of "class" behavior), I don't really like either of the men themselves.

They make you file the report on Wednesday, Thursday, and Friday. Under your example, everybody would be probable-people are only supposed to be on the injury report if they actually have some sort of injury right then. Questionable means they are supposed to be 50/50 to play that Sunday-for BB to put Harrison as questionable when he should put him as out instead basically feeds misinformation to the opponent, which is precisely why the NFL cracked down on injury reports in the first place.