Perfect Fit - Slick Rick

by **BRStang** » Mon Dec 10, 2007 4:06 pm

Insane_Pony_Posse wrote:Patton you are digging your hole deeper!

No he is not.

by **George S. Patton** » Mon Dec 10, 2007 4:07 pm

Insane_Pony_Posse wrote:Patton you are digging your hole deeper!

OK, thanks!

It would really be nice if people could actually read and comprehend.

by **Insane_Pony_Posse** » Mon Dec 10, 2007 4:07 pm

w/e i don't like him, he's boring and slimy

Explain how he is "slimy" or is that more fantasy land?

Oh and btw.....who is your "exciting" and non-slimy
choice that has expressed interest or is a realistic
choice for SMU?

by **Insane_Pony_Posse** » Mon Dec 10, 2007 4:08 pm

It would really be nice if people could actually read and comprehend.

yes starting with you!

by **PonyPatrol** » Mon Dec 10, 2007 4:09 pm

Boring??!

He was one of the most polarizing figures in the pack ten from the moment he was hired away from CU, to his untimely departure amid a huge (albeit innacurate) scandal...All this while winning conference titles and a Rose Bowl.

Do you need him to streak through the quad during halftime?

by **Insane_Pony_Posse** » Mon Dec 10, 2007 4:10 pm

No he is not.

yes he is
he is attempting to equate sourced with unsourced
they are in fact not equal in value

by **George S. Patton** » Mon Dec 10, 2007 4:11 pm

Insane_Pony_Posse wrote:It would really be nice if people could actually read and comprehend.

yes starting with you!

You have no idea how this works. And while you think Kate did a great job on the first story, you basically think she did a lousy job on the second.

AGAIN, KATE WROTE BOTH OF THESE STORIES.

by **SMUstang** » Mon Dec 10, 2007 4:11 pm

In my opinion, Barnett has a better track record.

by **SMUer** » Mon Dec 10, 2007 4:14 pm

The major argument here centers around "he wants to be a candidate" and "he will not be considered a candidate":

"he wants to be a candidate" - Kate made this appear like it was a direct quote from Rick. So yes, it would appear he wants to be a candidate.

"he will not be considered a candidate": - Kate appears to have talked to a source who is associated at some capacity with the search who has indicated he is not being considered. So no, at the time of that last story, Rick wasn't being considered a candidate.

Lets leave it like this: Rick would like to be a candidate but, at least until the point at which this article was written, wasn't being considered. Still, minds and desperation levels can change and so if the people associated with the HC hiring were ever to become interested in preliminary interviews, it appears Rick would be interested too.

by **George S. Patton** » Mon Dec 10, 2007 4:18 pm

Insane_Pony_Posse wrote:No he is not.

yes he is
he is attempting to equate sourced with unsourced
they are in fact not equal in value

That has nothing to do with it.

by **Insane_Pony_Posse** » Mon Dec 10, 2007 4:20 pm

"You have no idea how this works"

Oh really?
Come on General it's really not that complicated is it?

And while you think Kate did a great job on the first story,

No, I think she had a sourced story therefore more credible.
I don't blame her if someone is scared to be named, but it is certainly not as credible.

you basically think she did a lousy job on the second.

No I don't, unsourced does not equal lousy
it's just not a sure thing.

AGAIN, KATE WROTE BOTH OF THESE STORIES

Hello earth to patton?

The first story is a sure thing.
Coach Neuheisel is interested, that is a fact.
It's "straight from the horse's mouth".

The second story is not a sure thing because
it can not be verfied at this time. It is not a fact.

There is a difference!

by **PonyPatrol** » Mon Dec 10, 2007 4:24 pm

Barnett had two PHENOMINAL seasons at Northwestern in the mid nineties. Jim Grobe has done a similar job at Wake Forest, winning the ACC last year. However, Barnett left Northwestern after finishing last in the Big 10 with an 0-8 conf. record two years later, and if Grobe were to be back in the cellar in three years at Wake, how high would his stock be?

At CU he was pretty good. He posted a 49-39 record in seven seasons.

Neuheisel went 35-14 in four seasons at CU (winning all three bowl games). He then went 34-19 at UW. Pretty consistent at both schools winning between 65-70% of his games in power conferences. Three times he has finished in the top 10 in the country.

I would not complain one bit if Barnett were hired, but in my estimation Neuheisel is as accomplished a candidate as any that has been mentioned in this search. Oh, and he's 16 yrs. younger...

by **George S. Patton** » Mon Dec 10, 2007 4:28 pm

Insane_Pony_Posse wrote:The second story is not a sure thing because
it can not be verfied at this time. It is not a fact.

There is a difference![/color]

You're right there is a difference. Because if Kate had written that second story according to your reasoning, she'd be out of a job.

Ask yourself if a paper like the DMN is going to actually print something that CANNOT be verified.

If you think they do, then I can't help you any more.

by **RednBlue11** » Mon Dec 10, 2007 4:30 pm

Insane_Pony_Posse wrote:w/e i don't like him, he's boring and slimy

Explain how he is "slimy" or is that more fantasy land?

Oh and btw.....who is your "exciting" and non-slimy
choice that has expressed interest or is a realistic
choice for SMU?

i don't want exciting i want good, i don't think he is either, if the new coach happens to be exciting so be it thats a nice bonus ... personally i would like to see either 1) Bowden or 2) Barnett named the new head coach but Barnett is obviously "slimy" .... ive never had a high opinion on Neuheisel, i just always thought of him as slippery and devious or slimy as it were

by **PonyPatrol** » Mon Dec 10, 2007 4:31 pm

If Herbstreit can nationally report Les Miles is going to Michigan, I think we can question the validity of beat writer Kate's airtight sources...

Perfect Fit - Slick Rick

Who is online