Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
For anyone that thinks the media doesn't read message boards ...
09-15-2015, 05:04 PM,
Post: #11
RE: For anyone that thinks the media doesn't read message boards ...
Dumb article, lame premise.
09-15-2015, 05:05 PM,
Post: #12
RE: For anyone that thinks the media doesn't read message boards ...
(09-15-2015, 04:47 PM)dirtball Wrote:
(09-15-2015, 04:43 PM)AztecSU Wrote:
(09-15-2015, 04:34 PM)dirtball Wrote: Whether you like any SDSU football coach or not there is one thought that gets very old in my opinion.

The fact that just because we have a poor history means we should accepted a coach you may or may not think is mediocre. (im not talking about long specifically).

He does the same thing in this article.

He doesn't say you have to accept anything. I think he's pointing out the difference between reality and the reactions. Reality is we have a lot of season left and the tone of the specific threads on AM he pointed out were way over the top. 

In other words he is basically saying we see a fly and run to get the shotgun instead of the fly swatter. As fans it's our right to respond to things however we feel is necessary, but it's also okay for 3rd party observer's to point out the silliness of it all. That's just what he did, as did the Cal board folks before him.

I'm refencing this part;

[fon‌t=Georgia, serif]Only two coaches in SDSU history — Don Coryell (104-19-2, .840) and Claude Gilbert (61-26-2, .697) — have better winning percentages than Rocky Long (33-21, .611).[/font]

[fon‌t=Georgia, serif]Gilbert was fired after the 1980 season (when the Aztecs went 4-8 in the midst of changing the recruiting focus from JC to high school players) despite six winning seasons in eight years. Eight coaches have followed him. Al Luginbill and Ted Tollner are the only ones with as many as three winning seasons. Except for Rocky Long, who has had four winning seasons — in four years.[/font]


[fon‌t=Georgia, serif]IMHO the above has more to due with SDSU having an awful history as opposed to Rocky Long being great.

[/font]
He never says you have to accept anything though. And the part you are citing is the second half of the piece which he prefaces with, be careful what you wish for. 

There is a conversation to be had regarding Rocky's tenure, the successes, the failures, and the reality we still have a long way to go. But IMO the core of the piece, which are the extreme reactions, is spot on. 

I'll put it this way. What if the "pro-Rocky" crowd really was hardcore pro-Rocky? Posting he and staff should receive large raises for his record on the Mesa and that we should build a statue in his honor for all those bowl appearances. And that he should never be fired until he is ready to retire. Now, I 've never seen anyone say that, but that's the kind of intense irrational positive response it would take to match AM's negative vitriol.
09-15-2015, 05:07 PM,
Post: #13
RE: For anyone that thinks the media doesn't read message boards ...
(09-15-2015, 04:43 PM)AztecSU Wrote:
(09-15-2015, 04:34 PM)dirtball Wrote: Whether you like any SDSU football coach or not there is one thought that gets very old in my opinion.

The fact that just because we have a poor history means we should accepted a coach you may or may not think is mediocre. (im not talking about long specifically).

He does the same thing in this article.
In other words he is basically saying we see a fly and run to get the shotgun instead of the fly swatter. As fans it's our right to respond to things however we feel is necessary, but it's also okay for 3rd party observer's to point out the silliness of it all. That's just what he did, as did the Cal board folks before him.

The difference is, despite declining subscription numbers, how many people read the Cal board as opposed to the UT?
Come to think of it, the numbers are probably pretty close.....Never mind....
09-15-2015, 05:07 PM,
Post: #14
RE: For anyone that thinks the media doesn't read message boards ...
(09-15-2015, 04:55 PM)dirtball Wrote:
(09-15-2015, 04:47 PM)dirtball Wrote:
(09-15-2015, 04:43 PM)AztecSU Wrote:
(09-15-2015, 04:34 PM)dirtball Wrote: Whether you like any SDSU football coach or not there is one thought that gets very old in my opinion.

The fact that just because we have a poor history means we should accepted a coach you may or may not think is mediocre. (im not talking about long specifically).

He does the same thing in this article.

He doesn't say you have to accept anything. I think he's pointing out the difference between reality and the reactions. Reality is we have a lot of season left and the tone of the specific threads on AM he pointed out were way over the top. 

In other words he is basically saying we see a fly and run to get the shotgun instead of the fly swatter. As fans it's our right to respond to things however we feel is necessary, but it's also okay for 3rd party observer's to point out the silliness of it all. That's just what he did, as did the Cal board folks before him.

I'm refencing this part;

[fon‌t=Georgia, serif]Only two coaches in SDSU history — Don Coryell (104-19-2, .840) and Claude Gilbert (61-26-2, .697) — have better winning percentages than Rocky Long (33-21, .611).[/font]

[fon‌t=Georgia, serif]Gilbert was fired after the 1980 season (when the Aztecs went 4-8 in the midst of changing the recruiting focus from JC to high school players) despite six winning seasons in eight years. Eight coaches have followed him. Al Luginbill and Ted Tollner are the only ones with as many as three winning seasons. Except for Rocky Long, who has had four winning seasons — in four years.[/font]


[fon‌t=Georgia, serif]IMHO the above has more to due with SDSU having an awful history as opposed to Rocky Long being great.

[/font]

This is actually more of part i was referencing;

[fon‌t=RobotoCondensed]Online observers need to read up on their Aztecs history before calling for coach's dismissal[/font]

[fon‌t=RobotoCondensed]That statement is so weak in my opinion[/font]
Ohhh, I see. The click bait tag he used. Yeah, it feels purposely dickish to reel'em in. Didn't even notice that.
09-15-2015, 05:09 PM,
Post: #15
RE: For anyone that thinks the media doesn't read message boards ...
(09-15-2015, 05:05 PM)AztecSU Wrote: He never says you have to accept anything though. And the part you are citing is the second half of the piece which he prefaces with, be careful what you wish for. 

There is a conversation to be had regarding Rocky's tenure, the successes, the failures, and the reality we still have a long way to go. But IMO the core of the piece, which are the extreme reactions, is spot on. 

I'll put it this way. What if the "pro-Rocky" crowd really was hardcore pro-Rocky? Posting he and staff should receive large raises for his record on the Mesa and that we should build a statue in his honor for all those bowl appearances. And that he should never be fired until he is ready to retire. Now, I 've never seen anyone say that, but that's the kind of intense irrational positive response it would take to match AM's negative vitriol.

Now I know that I am a centrist/objective ... that over the top "positive" irrationality just made my skin crawl -- LoL
09-15-2015, 05:17 PM,
Post: #16
RE: For anyone that thinks the media doesn't read message boards ...
Another complaint (I know, I know) is he said Message Boards (plural). When in fact everything he referenced was from Aztec Mesa. Just say Aztec Mesa instead of grouping everyone in together.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
09-15-2015, 05:21 PM, (This post was last modified: 09-15-2015, 05:22 PM by HighNTight_SD.)
Post: #17
RE: For anyone that thinks the media doesn't read message boards ...
(09-15-2015, 05:17 PM)dirtball Wrote: Another complaint (I know, I know) is he said Message Boards (plural). When in fact everything he referenced was from Aztec Mesa. Just say Aztec Mesa instead of grouping everyone in together.

haha, I think that was an attempt to not single them out by name ... which was done in the comments section anyway. I agree, he could have said a message board.
09-15-2015, 05:27 PM,
Post: #18
RE: For anyone that thinks the media doesn't read message boards ...
(09-15-2015, 05:17 PM)dirtball Wrote: Another complaint (I know, I know) is he said Message Boards (plural). When in fact everything he referenced was from Aztec Mesa. Just say Aztec Mesa instead of grouping everyone in together.

Yeah, kind of a chicken**** move to call out people but to do it generally, especially when it all came from AM. I wonder if there is a specific reason he would site words typed but not the actual website.
09-15-2015, 06:27 PM,
Post: #19
RE: For anyone that thinks the media doesn't read message boards ...
(09-15-2015, 05:05 PM)AztecSU Wrote: I'll put it this way. What if the "pro-Rocky" crowd really was hardcore pro-Rocky? Posting he and staff should receive large raises for his record on the Mesa and that we should build a statue in his honor for all those bowl appearances. And that he should never be fired until he is ready to retire. Now, I 've never seen anyone say that, but that's the kind of intense irrational positive response it would take to match AM's negative vitriol.

Man, you absolutely nailed this.  That's what drives me absolutely bananas about what goes on over there.  You have people using the same exact language just from the polar opposite point of view and calling it being a "realist" yet if you point out anything remotely positive the program has done you're a kool aid sipping, rose colored glasses wearing homer.
09-15-2015, 09:15 PM,
Post: #20
RE: For anyone that thinks the media doesn't read message boards ...
LOL at APE trying to sound diplomatic and do damage control in the comments section. That guys never gets tired of beating the same drum.


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)