I'm almost sold on Dylan Favre.

[Stormrider81]

equals calling his rushing yards junk yards. That's not giving someone the benefit of the doubt, that's assuming that he can't run the football. Problem is, he gained 1,200 yards on the ground, so then there must be some reason he gained those yards. I mean, if he can run the football and gained nearly as many yards as Brunetti, that would kind of punch holes in the argument that offering Brunetti is great but offering Favre is a waste.

I hammered at your posts because they are ridiculous. Calling 1,200 yards rushing junk yards is absolutely ridiculous anyway you slice it. If the guy gained 1,200 yards on the ground, then yes he can run our offense. By the way, I never said we should offer him before everyone else, I just simply stated that he is worth spending a scholarship on. Seriously, what do we have to lose. I just don't get it. Answer that.

As far as the basketball comment, you have made some absolutely moronic posts on here this season regarding basketball and Stansbury. That coupled with your posts regarding Favre serve as proof you know little to nothing of what you speak.

 

[Stormrider81]

nm

 

[HD6]

and you can tell me how many quarterbacks under 6 feet currently are starters in the NFL? Or for any other SEC team?

 

[ckDOG]

Problem is, he gained 1,200 yards on the ground, so then there must be some reason he gained those yards.

Exactly! I'm just trying to understand that reason. Ignore the "junk yards" term if it keeps you from thinking about the point I was trying to make. I simply want to know how he got the rushing yards. Did he get them in a fashion comparable to as he would be asked to get them in our offense? Did he get them via a read option, or did was the field left wide open because the St. Stans offense spread the field out so much the high school defenders didn't know how to handle it? Alot of the MUS offense is based off read option football. Brunetti is at least somewhat familiar with what he would see at MSU should he show up. Bascially, he was asked to run the football and did well. Why? Because he's athletic, a solid runner, and built similar to a RB (5'11 200+lbs). There is a difference between being asked to run the football and being asked to run as a 2nd option when the defense is completely lost covering the 5 WRs you have running routes. I've never seen St. Stans play, which is why I'm asking these questions. You still haven't anwered them.

</p>

Seriously, what do we have to lose. I just don't get it. Answer that.

1 scholarship.

</p>

you have made some absolutely moronic posts on here this season regarding basketball and Stansbury.

Link it. No, I haven't.
</p>

 

[Stormrider81]

Again, we wouldn't be asking this guy to start from day one. The point of the 1,200 yards is he can run the football, as in he obviously has running ability.

By the way, what do you think we are going to do with Tyler Russell at QB? Do you think we are going to run the read option offense?

 

[ckDOG]

But isn't it obvious who Dan Mullen thinks will be better at it?

Again, we wouldn't be asking this guy to start from day one.

I'm not asking Brunetti to start from day 1 either. I just want us to get the best available quarterback out there. If we go the Favre route, I won't be totally disappointed knowing he's played defense before and can punt. As you've stated (and so have I), there's some outs for Favre should he be a bust at QB. But, if I could chose Brunetti or Favre for the sole purpose of playing the QB position a few down the road, regardless of whether it's to be the heir apparent to TR or just for depth purposes, I'm going with Brunetti. Sorry.

By the way, what do you think we are going to do with Tyler Russell at QB? Do you think we are going to run the read option offense?

TR will run the ball. Not as much as a Chris Relf would. But the core elements of the offense won't be abandoned because TR is a better passer than runner. This is the main reason I keep asking questions about running style. Can we expect Dylan to be successful at running in our offense in the SEC and why?

I'm certain Mullen is going to recruit QBs with skill sets compatible with his vision for the offense. Again, we've offered Brunetti and not Favre. I'm pretty sure Dan Mullen is smart enough to look up Dylan's stats. How is it that you give me **** for saying that Brunetti is better than Favre when we know the following to be true:

1) We've offered Brunetti
2) Brunetti didn't put up near the stats the Favre did
3) Brunetti committed elsewhere
4) We still didn't offer Favre

You obviously know something Mullen doesn't - I just want you to let me know what it is. You've called me an idiot and called me vehement. But, you've offered nothing other than a reference to stats - which are known to all parties involved. You might as well go ahead and call Mullen and the rest of the D1 coaching world idiots too because apparently they are under the same impression that there are better options.

And I'm still waiting for your references to the nasty terrible things I've said about Stans. I've actually defended the guy when others pick at him for stupid ****.

It's becoming obvious you just want to argue for the sake of arguing.

 

[Stormrider81]

If a guy comes in and measures 6'-0", alright we will recruit you. 5'-11", too bad, you are an inch short. After all, the NFL and the SEC doesn't take anyone an inch short. I still have yet to see what we have to lose from signing this guy.</p>