Favre is officially visiting Jan 24th**
- Thread starter dawgstudent
- Start date
but after watching Favre play in the State Championship and the All Star game, I say give him a shot. I think the kid has some serious upside just isn't the ideal size. If nothing else he will push some guys in practice. Competition is never a bad thing.
this is first hand. If he gets an offer from Mississippi State he will accept it. I know this isn't the first time yall have read this but I just heard it myself over the holiday.
More than anything, Im looking forward to watching Tyler Russell stand next to Dylan Favre.
Bottom line on Dylan Favre is that the guy excelled in High School and could excel in college. From what I understand, the guy hates to lose and will push himself and others to win.
I think he is a backup plan for Brunetti. I would think Mullen wants to sign a HS QB, and Brunetti is perfect for his offense. If MSU doesn't sign him, I would guess Favre would get the next look, but Im not sure.</p>
Bottom line on Dylan Favre is that the guy excelled in High School and could excel in college. From what I understand, the guy hates to lose and will push himself and others to win.
I think he is a backup plan for Brunetti. I would think Mullen wants to sign a HS QB, and Brunetti is perfect for his offense. If MSU doesn't sign him, I would guess Favre would get the next look, but Im not sure.</p>
nothing against your post, but who seriously likes losing? I've always hated that description of a player.
...OMlawdog, you are the one who said Dixon would be benched half-way through the 2009 season, because "Dixon will not fit into Mullen's spread offense."
Of course, Dixon only went on to put up numbers better than the Heisman Trophy winner.
So if I were you, I would lay off the "I think he is a backup plan for Brunetti" stuff. Because you have 0 credibility to make that observation. Or any other MSU-related observation for that matter.
Of course, Dixon only went on to put up numbers better than the Heisman Trophy winner.
So if I were you, I would lay off the "I think he is a backup plan for Brunetti" stuff. Because you have 0 credibility to make that observation. Or any other MSU-related observation for that matter.
I did say that I thought Dixon wouldn't fit well into Dixon's offense,. I was wrong about that, and have posted that about a half dozen times this season, but Im just glad to see you are remembering things that people post, hopefully you won't remember what you post so that you can continue to be a running joke.
Considering you have said the following things:
Mullen has made dumber decisions than Croom ever did.
Cohen should be fired if he got swept more than 3 times in his first season.
MSU's schedule this past season was set up easier to get to a bowl game, because playing the tougher opponents at home is what any good coach would want.
I drink alot and make things up and post them.
</p>
Considering you have said the following things:
Mullen has made dumber decisions than Croom ever did.
Cohen should be fired if he got swept more than 3 times in his first season.
MSU's schedule this past season was set up easier to get to a bowl game, because playing the tougher opponents at home is what any good coach would want.
I drink alot and make things up and post them.
</p>
Especially at the High School level. I remember getting bounced from the first round of the basketball playoffs, and on the bus ride back, most if not all of the guys were talking about weekend plans, while not really caring about the loss, when there were two other guys that were just crushed about the loss.
It happens in every sport, some guys just want to win more than others, it happens on the college level as well. Its a matter of priorities. Some of the most talented players would rather drink beer and chase tail, then work on their jump shot or be in the batting cage. Sure some guys can do both and be a college level player, but those guys are just blessesd with ridiculous talent. </p>
It happens in every sport, some guys just want to win more than others, it happens on the college level as well. Its a matter of priorities. Some of the most talented players would rather drink beer and chase tail, then work on their jump shot or be in the batting cage. Sure some guys can do both and be a college level player, but those guys are just blessesd with ridiculous talent. </p>
...you, on the other hand, are a phoney Ole Miss **** stirrer who takes subtle digs @ Miss. State by posting insane **** like "Dixon will be pulled half way through the season because he will not fit Mullen's spread offense."
And you are a lawyer?
You are a lawyer in the same way coach34 is a coach.
And you are a lawyer?
You are a lawyer in the same way coach34 is a coach.
is not "loves losing" but indifference. Some athletes are just riding the scholarship because of pressure from others (dad, relatives, etc) and winning takes a secondary position to staying injury free or just getting the perks of being on the football team. So a fired up Favre
might have an edge over another QB recruit who doesn't give a damn.
Just saying...........
might have an edge over another QB recruit who doesn't give a damn.
Just saying...........
Like "Mullen has made dumber decisions, than Croom ever did", I would agree with you that I was just posting stupid crap to get a rise out of MSU fans, since no one in their right mind would actually think that.
By the way, saying that a player won't fit into a certain offense really isn't a dig at MSU. If I said Tyler Russell didn't fit well into Mullen's offense, that is an opinion, and I don't think it is a dig at MSU, same way if someone said that Randall Mackey might not fit well in OM's offense. I don't see those as digs, just an opinion as how a player would fit into an offense.
Luckily my opinion on how Dixon played this season, wasn't the basis for any of my legal arguments this year, so luckily I wasn't called out on how wrong my prediction about Dixon was. </p>
By the way, saying that a player won't fit into a certain offense really isn't a dig at MSU. If I said Tyler Russell didn't fit well into Mullen's offense, that is an opinion, and I don't think it is a dig at MSU, same way if someone said that Randall Mackey might not fit well in OM's offense. I don't see those as digs, just an opinion as how a player would fit into an offense.
Luckily my opinion on how Dixon played this season, wasn't the basis for any of my legal arguments this year, so luckily I wasn't called out on how wrong my prediction about Dixon was. </p>
http://sixpackspeak.yuku.com/sreply/270281
Here is some of what you said. </p>
And, I'm still waiting for your case against me in bball.
Here is some of what you said. </p>
Just admit you got your panties in a wad when I suggested that there were better options out there than Favre. You tried to turn it into the ridiculous argument that Favre was a perfect fit for our offense because of his stats and his stats only. I wanted more explanation, you never gave it. Brunetti has been documented as an elite dual threat QB prospect with a skillset suited to our core offense. We wanted Brunetti from the start - not Dylan Favre. There has to be a reason for that. Again, I'm okay with Favre as long as we can't get the prospect we have ranked over him. That doesn't necesarrily translate to me thinking he's awful.
And, I'm still waiting for your case against me in bball.
Or did you look through Ronny's archives? Regardless, I'm glad you brought that back up. You'll notice that I didn't crap on Brunetti. I didn't say he was a bad prospect. What I said was Favre looks better to me. If we are offering Brunetti, I cannot understand the argument against offering Favre.
I also never argued that Favre was a perfect fit for our offense, what I argued is that he can run our offense. If we can mold our offense to Tyson Lee and Tyler Russell, we can mold it to Favre, provided he pans out.
I've also never seen a single good answer to the question of what we have to lose by signing Favre.
As far as the basketball comment, if I had Ronny's archives perhaps I could post it. As it is, I don't remember the specifics of what you posted, only the level of stupidity of that post.
I also never argued that Favre was a perfect fit for our offense, what I argued is that he can run our offense. If we can mold our offense to Tyson Lee and Tyler Russell, we can mold it to Favre, provided he pans out.
I've also never seen a single good answer to the question of what we have to lose by signing Favre.
As far as the basketball comment, if I had Ronny's archives perhaps I could post it. As it is, I don't remember the specifics of what you posted, only the level of stupidity of that post.
yall had plenty of guys that looked like SEC backs but couldn`t make your offense click. McCluster looked like a DIII wide receiver ........ why the hell did you play him at tailback if he didn`t look like one ?</p>
It will give this board 4 years of topic, that is "bitching about a SHORT quarterback". After reading all your comments about how Tyson Lee sucked because he was too short, you are all gung ho for a little short white quarterback that has a famous last name. Tyson put up tremendous numbers on the JUCO level, but that was good enough for most of you all.
Now we have a short white kid show has put up numbers with the help of recruited receivers and teammates, and you are going ape **** to sign him.
Jesus Christ people .. just listen at yourselves.
Now we have a short white kid show has put up numbers with the help of recruited receivers and teammates, and you are going ape **** to sign him.
Jesus Christ people .. just listen at yourselves.
It only takes 5 minutes. You don't need the Ronny archives, either. There's a search function that let's you look up all the stupid **** that anyone has ever said up until the great purge from way back when.
I noticed you didn't crap on Brunetti. You just said Favre was better. I just want to know why he's better when everybody that matters (Mullen and the rest of D1 football) doesn't agree with you. If and when we offer Favre, it's only because we've exhausted our preferred options. There's nothing wrong with that. As far as contingency plans go, we could do FAR FAR FAR worse especially factoring in he'd likely be relied on for depth and many think he could punt (why not?) or play defense (less likely). But, I still think you only offer Favre if you <span style="font-style: italic;">intend</span> on him filling a QB spot. The punt/defense part of him are just silver lining should we pick him up and should he not pan out at QB.
To answer your question about what there is to lose. If we offer Favre now, he will likely accept. If the staff thinks we still have any shot left at Brunetti, offering Favre could eliminate that shot. That's what we have to lose by offering - and the only thing, I think. If it turns out that he's our best option once everything settles, fine, we could be far worse off. We could pull a Walrus and not sign a QB and pray that everything works out fine. Fortunately, Mullen won't do that. And if "settling" means Dylan Favre, I'm okay with that.
And whatever it is I said about bball couldn't have been that stupid if you can't even remember what the hell it was. That's weak.
I noticed you didn't crap on Brunetti. You just said Favre was better. I just want to know why he's better when everybody that matters (Mullen and the rest of D1 football) doesn't agree with you. If and when we offer Favre, it's only because we've exhausted our preferred options. There's nothing wrong with that. As far as contingency plans go, we could do FAR FAR FAR worse especially factoring in he'd likely be relied on for depth and many think he could punt (why not?) or play defense (less likely). But, I still think you only offer Favre if you <span style="font-style: italic;">intend</span> on him filling a QB spot. The punt/defense part of him are just silver lining should we pick him up and should he not pan out at QB.
To answer your question about what there is to lose. If we offer Favre now, he will likely accept. If the staff thinks we still have any shot left at Brunetti, offering Favre could eliminate that shot. That's what we have to lose by offering - and the only thing, I think. If it turns out that he's our best option once everything settles, fine, we could be far worse off. We could pull a Walrus and not sign a QB and pray that everything works out fine. Fortunately, Mullen won't do that. And if "settling" means Dylan Favre, I'm okay with that.
And whatever it is I said about bball couldn't have been that stupid if you can't even remember what the hell it was. That's weak.