PotPot

I may be thinking too much also but I think the coach may be thinking about what is best for all of his players and not just one. If the other QB was not playing QB then the other QB would not be playing at all and would not have the scholarship offers that he has. The best thing for AU would be for Joey to be getting all the QB reps but Joey's coach don't work for AU he works for Bartram and his priority is, and should be, all of his kids at Bartram. Also, most HS coaches default to playing their best athlete at QB. This coach has the luxury of playing his best athlete everywhere because he has another guy who happens to be a legit D-1 QB himself.

What you are asking for will eventually put Gus, or any other coach for that matter, in a no win situation. What happens when the next kid actually is having academic issues? Does Gus lie by emphatically telling everyone that there are no issues legally, academically, etc? Or does he tell everyone what the issue is by virtue of not emphatically denying specific areas? The best way to avoid this problem is to consistently say nothing.

I know what all of those words mean. Put together in the manner that they are, however, is a little difficult to understand. But I'm old and it looks positive for Auburn so I'm good with it, lol. Not sure what some of those emojis mean either, but again, I'm old.

Since Fehoko has to sit out the 2017 season anyway, why not have him enroll later?

Hey, that could be a great play. Line up every QB in a stacked I formation......... I'll be back in a minute. Gotta go call Gus.

Well that's better than going three and out, at least.

There is a thread on it in the football rivals section. Only way I know about it.

Understood. And, yes, I was being a little sarcastic referring to the coach in La. being fired for attempting to ban uat.

Wait a minute, aren't high school coaches supposed to get fired for trying to prohibit coaches from visiting?

I don't think that complaining about the recruiting class has nearly the negative effect as the constant poor mouthing about the coaching staff (i.e. Gus) and the predictions that they will be fired next year and so on and so on. Many of the "insiders" and mods on this board are the most guilty of this.

Thanks

I refer to uat as updykes for one simple reason. It's insulting and derogatory and they don't like it. I'm pretty sure that's why you refer to them as uat. I can understand the sentiment of not wanting to give Harvey any attention, but for me, as long as it is negative and is a constant reminder of the character of their fans, I'm good with it. I, myself, try to never address them by their proper name. Some popular substitutes include uat, gumps, bammers, mullets, that team on the other side of the state, etc. On a side note, I wish someone would explain what "spuat" stands for so I can determine whether or not I want to use that. However, the term that currently seems to be the most insulting is "updykes". I mean, it even sounds bad without the relevant backstory. I hope you can accept this reasoning and possibly even embrace it yourself.

Ok this is the last post, lol. I ain't mad or nothing. Just didn't have any more to add. And I needed to at least pretend to be working for a little bit.

Last post on this. I promise I'm not just trying to argue and I don't think you are either. Yes, when you say stars matter, you are talking about overall team rankings. I understand and agree. But, by default, that means individual rankings have to count for something. I also understand the difference in HB style between FB or TE. IF Shenker was a true TE then it would make more sense. However, what I'm seeing is two guys destined to be blockers. Shenker is an inch taller. Lasater is presumably a good bit faster. Other than that, I don't see the difference. Of course the coaches have every right to just like one more than the other. I'm just saying I don't understand. Thanks. I'll hang up and listen.

I fully understand that rankings are not the be all, end all of the story. However, as you have said many times before, stars DO matter. And we seemed to think he was a good fit, otherwise, just a few days ago. Not trying to argue. If he was a true TE then I would just say that we were heading in a different direction. But since it was stated that he was going to be used as a blocker, then I don't understand the trade off.