I learned something new from Brock Huard today

[CougEd]

Ed, you are close to the correct interpretation of Leach's statement. Leach does not discuss or admit injuries. When asked for the gazillioneth time by media folks who should know better, he responds with gibberish/nonsense. "He chose not to play." "He is dealing with personal issues." "We decided to play someone else." "He is resting." All of which translate into "He is injured." Leach should not be taken literally when asked about these absences. Falk was obviously injured but CML was not going to admit that. It gets a bit silly at times but that is the way he is.

So after the Colorado game in which Falk was injured and carted off on a head-board. The game in which he seemed to be unconscious on the field… After the game CML was asked about the injury and his direct quote was Falk was, "healthy as can be." CML went on quite a tirade when an out of town reporter pressed the issue. He went off… But one of the last things he said during that press conference was in regards to when the decision between Falk and Bender would take place. CML stated in a very pissed off demeanor, "27 seconds before kick-off."

So that is just one example. There are video interviews from his first year, if you'd like to look them up, where he had similar comments about injuries, as the "healthy as can be" variety. He was asked quite a bit the first 2 years of his tenure at WSU. Same kind of answers.

When it comes to injuries, don't believe our coach, in any way. Not even on the kind of injury, as was aptly pointed out when Halliday broke his leg… or ankle… or whatever. CML didn't even know where the bone was in Halliday's… body. He's not to be believed on the 1) kind of injury (unless obvious like Halliday but even then he got it wrong), the 2) timeline for return or 3) even if the player is injured. That's the only real point.

Do I believe CML is lying? I guess in the literal sense, yes. He outright lies about injuries. But I don't believe he ever considers himself believable, either. He doesn't want to be believed. That's why he stated Falk was "healthy as can be".

Falks sister is more convincing than CML. CML knows it. Everyone knows it but Ed. By the way, in that tirade after Colorado, CML states,
The idiocy of asking me about injuries goes even several layers deeper when you consider the fact I have virtually no input on it. The doctors handle it.

Just my input.

You do get there are tons of "believable " stuff he could say.. None of our business. Again none of our business. We don't address players who weren't at practice. It is an internal matter. We don't have injuries at WSU. Doctors always have the final say. That isn't what he said in this case. He laid it at the feet of his player. All I did was repeat his words.

 

[CougEd]

Ed, you are close to the correct interpretation of Leach's statement. Leach does not discuss or admit injuries. When asked for the gazillioneth time by media folks who should know better, he responds with gibberish/nonsense. "He chose not to play." "He is dealing with personal issues." "We decided to play someone else." "He is resting." All of which translate into "He is injured." Leach should not be taken literally when asked about these absences. Falk was obviously injured but CML was not going to admit that. It gets a bit silly at times but that is the way he is.

Well you obviously have proven yourself over and over and over again to not be correct.

UW will finish around 7-6 every single year as long as they are remotely competent. It has a tremendous budget and tons of support. It has no disadvantage whatsoever. It's campus is in a metro area, it's athletic department is one of the richest etc. etc. and yet they always are mediocre it's who they are.

Our recruiting was in the gutter with only about 3-4 true Pac-12 starters before Leach showed up. Now as his guys have started to develop we have are more competitive now. UW's rebuild started with Sark and they are pretty much on par with where they should be.

So every year you should expect them to be about 7-6 that's their proven over time range.

In fact their overall win% as a program is .589 7-6 is .538 win % so they are pretty much in line with what they should do.

Our win % is .468 just under .500 slightly better than 5-7 So we should be slightly under .500 when we are doing it par the course.

You see Ed this is why we fired someone that had a .18 win% ...because it was garbage.

Leach finished the season .692 well above our average and hence won coach of the year.

Did Brock mean "long term" in evaluating who came further, or who came further from the end of 2014 when WSU had almost everyone back save the QB and a DT, or the team who lost Shelton, Peters, and Shaq in the first round, and I think Hanoli by the 60th player? I very much appreciated the data Datacoug..thanks.

Again, if you look at an 8 year history, sure, WSU came further. If you look at the last three years and what UW lost vs what we lost, I can see Huard's point. I thought we had a better team than the UW going into 2015. Didn't you?

I didn't think going into the season we would lose to them by 35, did you? Did we have an idea what Morrow and Wicks could do? How about Falk? What were the expectations of the oline with everyone returning? How about the dline with Destiny, Palcaio, McLennan, and Daryl Paulo up front? Did you think UW had better starts on the offensive line prior to 2015? The defensive line? The secondary and maybe linebackers they may have had an edge. Not at QB. So yeah, I can see for the 2015 season that was a bigger surprise they were above .500.

 

[Coug95man2]

You do get there are tons of "believable " stuff he could say.. None of our business. Again none of our business. We don't address players who weren't at practice. It is an internal matter. We don't have injuries at WSU. Doctors always have the final say. That isn't what he said in this case. He laid it at the feet of his player. All I did was repeat his words.

You said that you believe him on this specific point, that it was Falks decision. He's not a reliable source on this matter, as you've aptly pointed out. So what's your point? Why are you believing him on this point, but never in any other situation?

 

[CougEd]

You said that you believe him on this specific point, that it was Falks decision. He's not a reliable source on this matter, as you've aptly pointed out. So what's your point? Why are you believing him on this point, but never in any other situation?

Hmmm...I haven't made a comment one way or another. I simply used the verbiage he used in talking about Falk and playing in the Apple Cup. No more or less. I didn't offer up what I believed or don't believe.

 

[95coug]

We haven't drilled UW in an Apple Cup in 30+ years. Expecting that to happen is a fools errand.

1992 disagrees. And it was only 24 years ago.

 

[Coug95man2]

Hmmm...I haven't made a comment one way or another. I simply used the verbiage he used in talking about Falk and playing in the Apple Cup. No more or less. I didn't offer up what I believed or don't believe.

Then why are you asking if CML is a liar?

 

[Coug1990]

So after the Colorado game in which Falk was injured and carted off on a head-board. The game in which he seemed to be unconscious on the field… After the game CML was asked about the injury and his direct quote was Falk was, "healthy as can be." CML went on quite a tirade when an out of town reporter pressed the issue. He went off… But one of the last things he said during that press conference was in regards to when the decision between Falk and Bender would take place. CML stated in a very pissed off demeanor, "27 seconds before kick-off."

So that is just one example. There are video interviews from his first year, if you'd like to look them up, where he had similar comments about injuries, as the "healthy as can be" variety. He was asked quite a bit the first 2 years of his tenure at WSU. Same kind of answers.

When it comes to injuries, don't believe our coach, in any way. Not even on the kind of injury, as was aptly pointed out when Halliday broke his leg… or ankle… or whatever. CML didn't even know where the bone was in Halliday's… body. He's not to be believed on the 1) kind of injury (unless obvious like Halliday but even then he got it wrong), the 2) timeline for return or 3) even if the player is injured. That's the only real point.

Do I believe CML is lying? I guess in the literal sense, yes. He outright lies about injuries. But I don't believe he ever considers himself believable, either. He doesn't want to be believed. That's why he stated Falk was "healthy as can be".

Falks sister is more convincing than CML. CML knows it. Everyone knows it but Ed. By the way, in that tirade after Colorado, CML states,
The idiocy of asking me about injuries goes even several layers deeper when you consider the fact I have virtually no input on it. The doctors handle it.

Just my input.

This is exactly right. I could not have stated this better myself. Coach lies when he talks about player injuries. We all know this. He knows we know this. Personally, I have argued against this, as I do not think it helps the team as much as he thinks it does. But, whatever. He believes what he believes and it is a small thing.

 

[Coug1990]

Ed, you are close to the correct interpretation of Leach's statement. Leach does not discuss or admit injuries. When asked for the gazillioneth time by media folks who should know better, he responds with gibberish/nonsense. "He chose not to play." "He is dealing with personal issues." "We decided to play someone else." "He is resting." All of which translate into "He is injured." Leach should not be taken literally when asked about these absences. Falk was obviously injured but CML was not going to admit that. It gets a bit silly at times but that is the way he is.

Yes, this is all true. We all know how Leach talks (or doesn't) about injuries. It is interesting that ED does not seem to know.

 

[Coug1990]

Are you calling Leach a liar? He is the one who put it at the feet of his player. The one person who has that information at his hand is the head coach.

And while I heard contrary info to what his sister put out, I wouldn't call her a liar. I am not confident that the person who told me was accurate. It was info that seemed to agree with what Leach had said. But the person isn't connected to the program so I would never take "their" word over Leach's or even his sisters.

But I am not talking about that, I am talking about what Leach had said. Luke Falk elected not to play. Are you calling Leach a liar?

Same old DL, same response to my posts. I simply posted and repeated what our coach had said. Again, I would think the problem you have is with the person who distributed the info.

What he said after he was carted off at halftime is that he decided to give him the second half off. He didn't talk about what isn't a cold, but something that happens to be very serious that is going on in the game. He could have said we don't discuss those matters, he could have said he elected to give him the day off, he could have simply we don't discuss players who missed a practice. There are tons of things he could have said. What you know and I know is he said Luke elected not to play.

Yes, I am calling Coach Leach a liar when the subject is an injured player. After four years of being the coach of the team you love and follow, it is surprising you have not figured this out by now.

 

[CougEd]

Yes, I am calling Coach Leach a liar when the subject is an injured player. After four years of being the coach of the team you love and follow, it is surprising you have not figured this out by now.

Then what is the issue. I agreed that a falkless team made a difference in the Apple Cup, and simply used the words Leach who lies about injuries used.

 

[Coug1990]

Then what is the issue. I agreed that a falkless team made a difference in the Apple Cup, and simply used the words Leach who lies about injuries used.

Damn, when you're right, you're right.

I should have thought you were doing the same thing Coach Leach does, but in your way. He lies (about injuries). ED trolls. You were just trolling.

 

[kayak15]

An inaccurate statement is not a lie unless it would be credible to a normal person or the individual to whom the statement is directed. Leach is not lying when asked about absences. He simply answers with nonsense explanations when the player is injured. All those who are familiar with him should know that by now. He made it clear from the start that he would not answer questions involving injuries. I find it understandable that he gets a bit annoyed when repeatedly asked about this and becomes petulant and flippant at times. How many times does he have to say "no comment" or I won't discuss that" before these queries end? Probably until he retires.

 

[kayak15]

Then what is the issue. I agreed that a falkless team made a difference in the Apple Cup, and simply used the words Leach who lies about injuries used.

The Apple Cup with Falk present would have been a different game. Probably not sufficiently for us to win but it would almost certainly have been more competitive. Leach's words were meaningless and had nothing to do with anything. They were not meant to be taken seriously and we should not do so.

 

[Coug1990]

The Apple Cup with Falk present would have been a different game. Probably not sufficiently for us to win but it would almost certainly have been more competitive. Leach's words were meaningless and had nothing to do with anything. They were not meant to be taken seriously and we should not do so.

If ED knows like every other Cougar fan that what Leach says about injuries should be taken with a grain a salt, I am not sure why he brings up that Falk elected not to play.

Then ED passes it on as the truth in his own comment. Well, if ED knows its false, but continues the lie, what does that make ED?

 

[bogusto]

If ED knows like every other Cougar fan that what Leach says about injuries should be taken with a grain a salt, I am not sure why he brings up that Falk elected not to play.

Then ED passes it on as the truth in his own comment. Well, if ED knows its false, but continues the lie, what does that make ED?

Among a litany of more inflammatory descriptions, at the very least a jackass.

 

[Coug95man2]

One of the "weird'er" exchanges on this board, in a while… WTF… No point to any of it… Except maybe it propagates the inaccurate statement that "Falk elected to not play in the AC"... jibber jabber is all it is.


EDIT: And I only mean the exchange is weird due to one person, BTW. No "slight" towards anyone else…

 

[wazzucougs96]

You thought UW was a better team heading into 2015 replacing their QB, running back, offensive line, defensive line? I thought heading into the season we were head and shoulders above them.

How do you get this out of my comment that we shouldn't expect to drill them?

At full strength we were the better team. But we weren't at full strength and we piss down our legs in the Apple Cup nearly every year. There is never any reason to expect a win in the Apple Cup. That game is always hope and pray.

 

[wazzucougs96]

C'mon--'92 Apple cup (AKA the snow bowl)...42-23? I'd put that in the drilled column, and that was "only" 24 Apple cups ago.

Good call. So close to 30 years ago.

 

[CougEd]

If ED knows like every other Cougar fan that what Leach says about injuries should be taken with a grain a salt, I am not sure why he brings up that Falk elected not to play.

Then ED passes it on as the truth in his own comment. Well, if ED knows its false, but continues the lie, what does that make ED?

1990..you do crack me up. This was about expectations going into the season amnd me thinking we were much better off than UW. Yaki claims I didn't factor Falks injury into getting beat. (did anyone factor in John ross' injury? Or any other injury) I won't used the word drilled because somehow it offends people even though that is exactly what happened. But the discussion wasn't about Leach at the time. You seemed to be offended by the choice of his words.

I used Leach's words about Falk not playing. Didn't make a comment whether I believe it or not. I find it hard to believe personally that any player carted off on a Saturday will be ready the next Friday.

Then you throw out I am calling Falk's sister a liar cause I don't follow her (or anyone for that matter) on twitter. I have no idea what his sister said about the injury.

I do know the words used by Leach. Do I know for sure Falk wasn't cleared to play? I have actually heard conflicting info. And now I know what his sister had said.

Again, piss and moan at the guy whose words I actually quoted.

By the way, there are tons of lies he could have told. Or simply used the old stand by "we don't have injuries at wsu".

And to be honest for his own sake I wish he wasn't so flip about concussions. He already had one episode regarding concussions I would hope he would learn to be a little more careful cause it already caused his problems at Tech.

 

[YakiCoug]

Damn, when you're right, you're right.

I should have thought you were doing the same thing Coach Leach does, but in your way. He lies (about injuries). ED trolls. You were just trolling.

Stop picking on HecEd! Mama Flat is gonna get you.

 

[YakiCoug]

John Ross plays QB? Thanks for offering that.
Btw, you dismiss the impact the absence of Falk, Cracraft, Dahl, and Sorenson had on the offense in the 2015 AC, but you also say your latest prediction for success in 2016 hinges on Falk's staying healthy. Can't have it both ways, HecEd. Got your husky season tickets yet?

1990..you do crack me up. This was about expectations going into the season amnd me thinking we were much better off than UW. Yaki claims I didn't factor Falks injury into getting beat. (did anyone factor in John ross' injury? Or any other injury) I won't used the word drilled because somehow it offends people even though that is exactly what happened. But the discussion wasn't about Leach at the time. You seemed to be offended by the choice of his words.

I used Leach's words about Falk not playing. Didn't make a comment whether I believe it or not. I find it hard to believe personally that any player carted off on a Saturday will be ready the next Friday.

Then you throw out I am calling Falk's sister a liar cause I don't follow her (or anyone for that matter) on twitter. I have no idea what his sister said about the injury.

I do know the words used by Leach. Do I know for sure Falk wasn't cleared to play? I have actually heard conflicting info. And now I know what his sister had said.

Again, piss and moan at the guy whose words I actually quoted.

By the way, there are tons of lies he could have told. Or simply used the old stand by "we don't have injuries at wsu".

And to be honest for his own sake I wish he wasn't so flip about concussions. He already had one episode regarding concussions I would hope he would learn to be a little more careful cause it already caused his problems at Tech.

 

[Coug1990]

1990..you do crack me up. This was about expectations going into the season amnd me thinking we were much better off than UW. Yaki claims I didn't factor Falks injury into getting beat. (did anyone factor in John ross' injury? Or any other injury) I won't used the word drilled because somehow it offends people even though that is exactly what happened. But the discussion wasn't about Leach at the time. You seemed to be offended by the choice of his words.

I used Leach's words about Falk not playing. Didn't make a comment whether I believe it or not. I find it hard to believe personally that any player carted off on a Saturday will be ready the next Friday.

Then you throw out I am calling Falk's sister a liar cause I don't follow her (or anyone for that matter) on twitter. I have no idea what his sister said about the injury.

I do know the words used by Leach. Do I know for sure Falk wasn't cleared to play? I have actually heard conflicting info. And now I know what his sister had said.

Again, piss and moan at the guy whose words I actually quoted.

By the way, there are tons of lies he could have told. Or simply used the old stand by "we don't have injuries at wsu".

And to be honest for his own sake I wish he wasn't so flip about concussions. He already had one episode regarding concussions I would hope he would learn to be a little more careful cause it already caused his problems at Tech.

ED, I call you out because you troll. Several of us have had this conversation with you in the past. Everyone knows that Leach does not discuss injuries. There is no such thing in his mind. So you know that anything he says regarding an injury is to be taken with a grain of salt.

You have also used the Falk elected not to play because Leach said so in the past. Several people discussed this with you and several people brought up Falk's sister's tweet. So, you have zero excuse, as you cannot say you did not know. You do know.

You are just trying to troll and get a rise out of people. That you are successful. But, it does not say much about you.

 

[YakiCoug]

ED, I call you out because you troll. Several of us have had this conversation with you in the past. Everyone knows that Leach does not discuss injuries. There is no such thing in his mind. So you know that anything he says regarding an injury is to be taken with a grain of salt.

You have also used the Falk elected not to play because Leach said so in the past. Several people discussed this with you and several people brought up Falk's sister's tweet. So, you have zero excuse, as you cannot say you did not know. You do know.

You are just trying to troll and get a rise out of people. That you are successful. But, it does not say much about you.

Beware the wooden spoon!

 

[sponge12]

ED, I call you out because you troll. Several of us have had this conversation with you in the past. Everyone knows that Leach does not discuss injuries. There is no such thing in his mind. So you know that anything he says regarding an injury is to be taken with a grain of salt.

You have also used the Falk elected not to play because Leach said so in the past. Several people discussed this with you and several people brought up Falk's sister's tweet. So, you have zero excuse, as you cannot say you did not know. You do know.

You are just trying to troll and get a rise out of people. That you are successful. But, it does not say much about you.

I find it interesting that you say Ed just trolls to get a rise out of people...but you don't say a word when the biggest troll of them all(your buddy Yaki) posts here every just to get a rise out of people.

Why is that?

You say that about everyone you disagree with(Chinook comes to mind)

Also, aren't you the one who started a thread about how everyone needs to quit being mean to everyone when your buddy died? Yet you are the biggest dick on this forum outside Thong and the resident Nut Job.

Way to honor your buddy. Hypocrite.

 

[Coug1990]

I find it interesting that you say Ed just trolls to get a rise out of people...but you don't say a word when the biggest troll of them all(your buddy Yaki) posts here every just to get a rise out of people.

Why is that?

You say that about everyone you disagree with(Chinook comes to mind)

Also, aren't you the one who started a thread about how everyone needs to quit being mean to everyone when your buddy died? Yet you are the biggest dick on this forum outside Thong and the resident Nut Job.

Way to honor your buddy. Hypocrite.

Tell your brother to stop trolling. Then, there is no issue. He could have made the original statement and got his point across without accusing Falk of electing not to play. Yet, he chose his words to incite. That is what he does, it is what you do.

There is something seriously wrong with you Sponge. I do not see any hypocrisy. I do see you using the death of a fellow Coug for selfish reasons. That is F'n sick.

 

[sponge12]

Tell your brother to stop trolling. Then, there is no issue. He could have made the original statement and got his point across without accusing Falk of electing not to play. Yet, he chose his words to incite. That is what he does, it is what you do.

There is something seriously wrong with you Sponge. I do not see any hypocrisy. I do see you using the death of a fellow Coug for selfish reasons. That is F'n sick.

Actually, there is something seriously wrong with you.

You are the one who used your buddy as an example on how everyone should treat people on this board...then 2 days later you are back to your old self.

That's pretty messed up...and the definition of a hypocrite.

Instead of being mad at me for pointing out your hypocrisy, you should
have meant what you said and followed through on it.

 

[Coug1990]

Actually, there is something seriously wrong with you.

You are the one who used your buddy as an example on how everyone should treat people on this board...then 2 days later you are back to your old self.

That's pretty messed up...and the definition of a hypocrite.

Instead of being mad at me for pointing out your hypocrisy, you should
have meant what you said and followed through on it.

Whatever gets you by. I am done discussing a friends death with you.

 

[brettcraycraft51]

Actually, there is something seriously wrong with you.

You are the one who used your buddy as an example on how everyone should treat people on this board...then 2 days later you are back to your old self.

That's pretty messed up...and the definition of a hypocrite.

Instead of being mad at me for pointing out your hypocrisy, you should
have meant what you said and followed through on it.

how many times have you signed up on here in order to engage in conversations like this? i'm not sure you're allowed to tell others there's something seriously wrong with them...

 

[YakiCoug]

how many times have you signed up on here in order to engage in conversations like this? i'm not sure you're allowed to tell others there's something seriously wrong with them...

What? There's something seriously wrong with someone who obsessively continues creating new handles after ban after ban?

 

[sponge12]

Whatever gets you by. I am done discussing a friends death with you.

I wasn't discussing a friends death...I was discussing your behavior and hypocrisy.

Spin it however you like if it makes you feel better, but if you don't like being called out, then don't say you are going to act a certain way on behalf of your buddy...then not do it.

 

[Coug95man2]

I wasn't discussing a friends death...I was discussing your behavior and hypocrisy.

Spin it however you like if it makes you feel better, but if you don't like being called out, then don't say you are going to act a certain way on behalf of your buddy...then not do it.

You have been banned several times. To re-define that, it means you aren't wanted here. Yet you continue to create new accounts in order to incite. You are purposefully placing yourself in a place that isn't wanting you to patron it. Basically, a coffee shop owner in downtown has asked you to stop coming into his shop because you start verbal fights. You continue to come in and you are continually being asked to leave. Please stop. Thanks.

And I don't care your angle, I don't care whom it is, to bring up a friends death to prove a point like this, is pretty ridiculous.

 

[Coug1990]

You have been banned several times. To re-define that, it means you aren't wanted here. Yet you continue to create new accounts in order to incite. You are purposefully placing yourself in a place that isn't wanting you to patron it. Basically, a coffee shop owner in downtown has asked you to stop coming into his shop because you start verbal fights. You continue to come in and you are continually being asked to leave. Please stop. Thanks.

And I don't care your angle, I don't care whom it is, to bring up a friends death to prove a point like this, is pretty ridiculous.

Thanks 95. I will not respond to anything he writes about this subject. Unknown to anyone else because I did not post anything about it because I did not want to turn this into a woe is me show.

But, within that week, there was another tragedy with another of my Cougar friends.
I mostly stopped posting for a while. So, whatever the person wrote about after that situation is a flat out lie. I am sure that does not surprise you or anyone.

With a lot of the arguments, I mostly just ignore them. So, I don't read a lot of what goes on between people unless it is a football related debate. With this with ED, I was the one who pointed out how he worded something. I was involved.

Anyway, thanks 95.

 

[CougEd]

ED, I call you out because you troll. Several of us have had this conversation with you in the past. Everyone knows that Leach does not discuss injuries. There is no such thing in his mind. So you know that anything he says regarding an injury is to be taken with a grain of salt.

You have also used the Falk elected not to play because Leach said so in the past. Several people discussed this with you and several people brought up Falk's sister's tweet. So, you have zero excuse, as you cannot say you did not know. You do know.

You are just trying to troll and get a rise out of people. That you are successful. But, it does not say much about you.

Ummm 1990...Like I said, I never once saw Falk's sister tweet. I also have heard information to the contrary. Leach doesn't like to discuss players that are hurt. I could easily seeing Leach being pissed if Luke was advised by his mother not to play. I don't know if the staff cleared him or not.

I do know Leach has very little time for injuries. Just because you claim you have told me about his sisters tweet, I clearly didn't see it until now.

And you know, Leach could have laid this at universities feet, he could have said he chose not to play him. he could have sad he chose to give the kid the day off. He could have said one of the many goofy thing he has said in the past. Saying a kid chose not to play when he wasn't really pressed on the issue plays to what I heard mid week of Apple Cup.

Again, I don't know what is true and isn't. Again if he words used cause you discomfort either have a chat with Leach or don't read them,

 

[Coug95man2]

Ummm 1990...Like I said, I never once saw Falk's sister tweet. I also have heard information to the contrary. Leach doesn't like to discuss players that are hurt. I could easily seeing Leach being pissed if Luke was advised by his mother not to play. I don't know if the staff cleared him or not.

I do know Leach has very little time for injuries. Just because you claim you have told me about his sisters tweet, I clearly didn't see it until now.

And you know, Leach could have laid this at universities feet, he could have said he chose not to play him. he could have sad he chose to give the kid the day off. He could have said one of the many goofy thing he has said in the past. Saying a kid chose not to play when he wasn't really pressed on the issue plays to what I heard mid week of Apple Cup.

Again, I don't know what is true and isn't. Again if he words used cause you discomfort either have a chat with Leach or don't read them,

It's been stated over and over, E.D. It has nothing to do with CML saying it. We all know not to believe anything he says regarding injuries… as you've stated yourself. It's you propagating this specific turn of phrase any more than CML's quote right after the game when he said he's "healthy as can be"... or any other phrase he used.

You've admitted you don't know the truth. Why continue pushing this narrative? Just because he had other options of wording? You really think he sits and thinks of proper or improper wording, wording you take exception to or makes your curious or whatever? Who gives a rip? Your impulse for looking in the past and doing so with a negative light is amazing.

 

[CougEd]

It's been stated over and over, E.D. It has nothing to do with CML saying it. We all know not to believe anything he says regarding injuries… as you've stated yourself. It's you propagating this specific turn of phrase any more than CML's quote right after the game when he said he's "healthy as can be"... or any other phrase he used.

You've admitted you don't know the truth. Why continue pushing this narrative? Just because he had other options of wording? You really think he sits and thinks of proper or improper wording, wording you take exception to or makes your curious or whatever? Who gives a rip? Your impulse for looking in the past and doing so with a negative light is amazing.

Actually 95....didn't look at anything in a negative light. We were talking about Huard's comments, I used the word "drilled" in describing the events of the Apple Cup. Did I write anything at the time of the game or even since that was negative?

Someone took offense to the word "drilled" and how I didn't factor in Falk's injury. Yeah I did. I could have been negative and like others have been over the years and said "if Clay knew how to get his second team ready we wouldn't have had to play the last two Apple Cup's without our second string QB." Injuries happen. Clay has done a really good job, we have been unfortunate to suffer a key injury. But rather I focused on what happened, and enjoyed the season . Yes, I believe not having Falk impacted the game. Do I believe by 35 points? Nope. But he not playing in my mind really put us at a disadvantage, although even with experience not sure Browning is head and shoulders above Bender. And with how Leach gets his second string QB reps I am a bit surprised at the number of turnovers that led to a blowout.

I could easily make a case where Leach was very serious when he spoke of Falk's injury. Has there ever been a time in the four years he said a player "chose" not to play? Never. If he did I never heard it. I do know Falk played the entire year with a broken pinky on his non throwing hand. He seems like a kid who will play through anything. But this is the first time Leach ever put the injury at the feet of a player, which makes it plausible along with other information I heard that it could be plausible Falk missed the game after being cleared (possibly) but rightfully did not play even if he was cleared. Again, I have heard from people who told me he was cleared. Do I 100% trust that information? Nope. But for you or 1990 or anyone to get riled up that I used the adjective "chose" is almost comical. The year was a great year, and I look forward to a similar year next year.

And if Leach ever asked me my opinion, I would tell him for the programs sake and more importantly for his sake I would have a little more sensitivity when it comes to a concussion in light of the things he was accused of and the reason for his termination. I would hate to see a cavalier attitude put his job even remotely in a compromised position. I had the most ardent leach supporter text me after Falk got injured in the CU game incensed over his remarks about a guy who just got carted off on a stretcher. This person felt concussion and potential neck injuries should be treated differently than "we are giving him the second half off".

 

[sponge12]

You have been banned several times. To re-define that, it means you aren't wanted here. Yet you continue to create new accounts in order to incite. You are purposefully placing yourself in a place that isn't wanting you to patron it. Basically, a coffee shop owner in downtown has asked you to stop coming into his shop because you start verbal fights. You continue to come in and you are continually being asked to leave. Please stop. Thanks.

And I don't care your angle, I don't care whom it is, to bring up a friends death to prove a point like this, is pretty ridiculous.

Thanks for your 2 cents 95.

I have zero respect for Scott. He banned Chinook for far less than what people like Tron, Yaki, and Whitworth do all the time.

He caved to the mob and your group think mentality. He needs to grow a pair...and I have told him as much

This board actually used to be a good board...and I was a member for ten yrs with zero problems before you showed up.

It wasn't until Tony sold the site and the new people, like yourself showed up, that this board went to sh!t.

Its funny, I didn't see you or 1990 say anything when Yaki made fun of our "poor dead mommy" which got him banned btw.

He would still be banned if it weren't for a new admin who also had no spine(Britton) and people on this board thought that behavior was acceptable.

If someone starts a thread and makes a pledge to treat people better in the name of their friend, and then is a dick day in and day out(not just to me or Ed...but others as well) then they deserve to be called out.

As for your issues with this being one of the "weirder" threads, I would say look in the mirror at your posts patting yourself on the back for having dinner with old people, drug addicts, and talking about guns.

 

[Coug95man2]

Thanks for your 2 cents 95.

I have zero respect for Scott. He banned Chinook for far less than what people like Tron, Yaki, and Whitworth do all the time.

He caved to the mob and your group think mentality. He needs to grow a pair...and I have told him as much

This board actually used to be a good board...and I was a member for ten yrs with zero problems before you showed up.

It wasn't until Tony sold the site and the new people, like yourself showed up, that this board went to sh!t.

Its funny, I didn't see you or 1990 say anything when Yaki made fun of our "poor dead mommy" which got him banned btw.

He would still be banned if it weren't for a new admin who also had no spine(Britton) and people on this board thought that behavior was acceptable.

If someone starts a thread and makes a pledge to treat people better in the name of their friend, and then is a dick day in and day out(not just to me or Ed...but others as well) then they deserve to be called out.

As for your issues with this being one of the "weirder" threads, I would say look in the mirror at your posts patting yourself on the back for having dinner with old people, drug addicts, and talking about guns.

I'll only say this, Sponge. If anyone had any problem with some of the off-topic discussions, I'd have stopped in a heartbeat. Just say the word. This is a community and yes, I'll acquiesce to the majority, in a heartbeat.

Regarding Yaki, you mean the guy I have "ignored"? I don't read crap he says. So say what you will about him. I'm out of the loop on that one.

You have a litany of issues with this board, yet you continue to show up.
EDIT: And I don't care of your "point" for calling 1990 out. I think he's been very civil, considering. Using a dead friend as you have is just… poor taste. Did Yaki do it, too? Guess what? Poor taste on Yaki, too. If it was your mother, I'd say a touch more than what you did. Congrats! You were ALMOST as bad as Yaki!

 

[Coug95man2]

Actually 95....didn't look at anything in a negative light. We were talking about Huard's comments, I used the word "drilled" in describing the events of the Apple Cup. Did I write anything at the time of the game or even since that was negative?

Someone took offense to the word "drilled" and how I didn't factor in Falk's injury. Yeah I did. I could have been negative and like others have been over the years and said "if Clay knew how to get his second team ready we wouldn't have had to play the last two Apple Cup's without our second string QB." Injuries happen. Clay has done a really good job, we have been unfortunate to suffer a key injury. But rather I focused on what happened, and enjoyed the season . Yes, I believe not having Falk impacted the game. Do I believe by 35 points? Nope. But he not playing in my mind really put us at a disadvantage, although even with experience not sure Browning is head and shoulders above Bender. And with how Leach gets his second string QB reps I am a bit surprised at the number of turnovers that led to a blowout.

I could easily make a case where Leach was very serious when he spoke of Falk's injury. Has there ever been a time in the four years he said a player "chose" not to play? Never. If he did I never heard it. I do know Falk played the entire year with a broken pinky on his non throwing hand. He seems like a kid who will play through anything. But this is the first time Leach ever put the injury at the feet of a player, which makes it plausible along with other information I heard that it could be plausible Falk missed the game after being cleared (possibly) but rightfully did not play even if he was cleared. Again, I have heard from people who told me he was cleared. Do I 100% trust that information? Nope. But for you or 1990 or anyone to get riled up that I used the adjective "chose" is almost comical. The year was a great year, and I look forward to a similar year next year.

And if Leach ever asked me my opinion, I would tell him for the programs sake and more importantly for his sake I would have a little more sensitivity when it comes to a concussion in light of the things he was accused of and the reason for his termination. I would hate to see a cavalier attitude put his job even remotely in a compromised position. I had the most ardent leach supporter text me after Falk got injured in the CU game incensed over his remarks about a guy who just got carted off on a stretcher. This person felt concussion and potential neck injuries should be treated differently than "we are giving him the second half off".

I'm only going to respond to the idea that this was a negative "thing". It's negative because your comments place more emphasis on something that you have no knowledge of, admittedly. As I and 1990 have stated, it isn't the content of the statement, E.D.. It's that you are placing any more emphasis on a potential lie, than any other lie CML has stated about injuries. You see plausibility in this specific statement. I certainly don't. Thus I don't think propagating it any more than any other comment is worthy. Don't want to speak for anyone else but I have the feeling that's the crux of the debate for others, as well. You have made this a much bigger issue by not realizing it has nothing to do with what CML said. It has nothing to do with the idea that it might be true! We don't know. You propagating it as "plausible truth" without knowing anything is the only, only issue I have.

I will also state clearly, I use the term "Lie" in loose terms. It isn't the truth but it isn't intended to be taken as truth, either. Just reminding all that concept.

You are clearly free to believe as you wish. I'm only trying to state clearly what my disagreement is on this point. No big, just don't believe you have any credibility on it. As you've aptly pointed out, as well.