Recruiting Football Talk VII

Status
Not open for further replies.
#56,226
#56,226
volbeast33 said:
Kap sucked and was on his way out of the league…. If he was a stud….. the NFL wouldn’t have cared.
Click to expand...

IDK people still go off about him kneeling. I doubt he stays a starter but I think he's def. still playing if his protest hadn't sent a segment of the NFL's fanbase into an uproar. People will boycott over upset like that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: #Vol4Life1991
#56,228
#56,228
UTProf said:
It speaks volumes about our priorities that we let guys who murder, rape, and abuse women, children and animals play but a guy that kneeled is still public enemy number 1. I have never understood why anyone cared about Kaepernick's politics enough to ostracize him (or anyone else for that matter). Nothing he ever did was that extreme and the reaction to it gave him more attention than was ever warranted.
Click to expand...
I hate the po💩...but if he was worth a damn he would be on a team...the ultra woke NFL don't givea💩 anyway.
 
  • Like
Reactions: rikberry31, InVOLuntary, Orangeredblooded and 5 others
#56,229
#56,229
Ulysees E. McGill said:
I hate the po💩
Click to expand...

But why hate someone you don't agree with? That's what I don't get. We get more upset when someone disagrees us than we do when someone actually does something horrible. I don't have to agree with the politics of every player. It's no skin off my nose if one believes something I think is off the wall or wrong.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JoeyVols32, #Vol4Life1991, Wadetime and 2 others
#56,230
#56,230
TheRain said:


iu

iu


Downey isn't the series version but this is my choice.
Click to expand...

Monk


tenor.gif


Or Sean & Gus

R.87a7c46eba93eb68301a37d95c42ea46
 
  • Like
Reactions: InVOLuntary, Enki_Amenra, TheRain and 1 other person
#56,232
#56,232
UTProf said:
It speaks volumes about our priorities that we let guys who murder, rape, and abuse women, children and animals play but a guy that kneeled is still public enemy number 1. I have never understood why anyone cared about Kaepernick's politics enough to ostracize him (or anyone else for that matter). Nothing he ever did was that extreme and the reaction to it gave him more attention than was ever warranted.
Click to expand...

I agree with the first part...but I also think the other side pushes a very specific narrative about Kaepernick without looking at his performances.

He played 2 full seasons in his time at the 49ers, between injuries and just his own inability to play at a high level he was already on his way out of the league. In this age of the NFL you can't be a sub 60% completion guy who averages less than 8 yards an attempt. Not to mention his decline from the injuries as a running threat made him far less dynamic as a QB.

I mean people call Lamar Jackson just a RB and he's thrown for 64.5% for his career and 114 TDs vs 43 INTs.

I do think Kaepernick got some unjust treatment because of his politics...but I also wonder why he wasn't rocking the boat earlier in his career when his starting job wasn't in jeopardy because of his poor results on the field.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 24/7vol and UTProf
#56,235
#56,235
SSVol said:
Not really a fair comparison. Army would never operate that way independent of the Air Force, and in concert with the AF, would be quite a handful. With that said, HIMARS has a 50 mile range, which I think is outside the range of big Navy guns, and Army ADA might have an opinion about how well Navy air power would operate on their turf. Given that Army can choose where inland they wish to operate, I'm not so sure it would be the slaughter you think.
Click to expand...
So you admit Army would need help....
 
  • Like
Reactions: 85SugarVol and Orangeredblooded
#56,236
#56,236
Enki_Amenra said:
Ok, army & air force vs navy + national guard?
Click to expand...
Yea, you would have to give Air Force support to Army to put them on equal footing.

No need to call up the Guard. There’s about 5,000 Marines deployed on Navy boats right now in the Persian Gulf & South China Sea.
 
#56,242
#56,242
SSVol said:
Not really a fair comparison. Army would never operate that way independent of the Air Force, and in concert with the AF, would be quite a handful. With that said, HIMARS has a 50 mile range, which I think is outside the range of big Navy guns, and Army ADA might have an opinion about how well Navy air power would operate on their turf. Given that Army can choose where inland they wish to operate, I'm not so sure it would be the slaughter you think.
Click to expand...
Oooo yall talking HIMARS and GMLRS :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: SSVol and 85SugarVol
#56,244
#56,244
SSVol said:
Not really a fair comparison. Army would never operate that way independent of the Air Force, and in concert with the AF, would be quite a handful. With that said, HIMARS has a 50 mile range, which I think is outside the range of big Navy guns, and Army ADA might have an opinion about how well Navy air power would operate on their turf. Given that Army can choose where inland they wish to operate, I'm not so sure it would be the slaughter you think.
Click to expand...
Well of course the Army would never operate independently - doing so would result in an absolute slaughter.

US Army ATACMS is fired from HIMARS at +3x that range, but it is inconsequential vs the US Navy.

Navy SM-6 can reach out 250 miles
Navy LRASM out to 500 miles

And US Navy Tomahawks can reach out and touch you at 1500 miles - literally nowhere inland the US Army could take up position and be out of range.

It would be a bloodletting.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nash_Vol97
New posts
Status
Not open for further replies.

VN Store



Back
Top