Burger
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- May 23, 2009
- Messages
- 14,329
- Likes
- 5,280
I do think he could be a quality option at WR. Only issue there is where we have North, Pearson, Malone, and all the other talent there, it could be a while before he see's the field. Of course there are other things that could factor into that. Does he play QB his SR year? If so, it could slow his development at WR. Does he even play for American Heritage HS at all as a SR? IF he changes schools, where would his new coach play him? A lot to still be determined here IMO.
Or we could sign Gibson.
Jennings decides to move to safety.
Jennings finds his true home.
Future AA
Gibson perfects his craft and is also named AA.
WIN WIN
Eh, Volnation just on the rag. No offense to the ladies out there I love each and everyone of you.
Bringing politics into recruiting? I bet you're a blast in real life lol.
But seriously, he's more than entitled to his opinion but do you have a link or proof of Gibson's lack of "intensity and attitude"? That's the part I was responding to.
Please, enlighten me.
I thought about saying that but changed my mind because we tend to call each other girls all the time when boys would work just as well and children/toddlers/temper tantrum would work as well or better.
For me, I've got nieces I adore and don't want them thinking I consider them less than the nephews I adore so I try to limit my use of using girl/women as an insult and stay neutral. Not a PC thing so much as making sure that they know I love them no matter what and wanting them to know they can go into anything not just girlie stuff but math and science if they want. They're worth just as much to me and getting in the habit of saying acting like children or toddlers helps make sure I instill that in them.
That said since we're all adults here, I gotta agree VN's definitely on the rag!![]()
Oh yeah, I don't know if I have ever believed there was anything a girl couldn't do that a guy could, except admit when shes wrong. Sometimes the only way to get a point across is to go to an extreme. It was all being said in good fun.
No, I really can't remember a time when I heard a female admit she was wrong and actually believed it.
Anyway..... gibson, I would like to get him in orange, no homo, I would think we can find room for an athlete like him. Especially if we take him as a wide receiver who could be moved to QB if needed. (just to switch this whole debate around)
I don't have proof of anything other than YOU attacking and putting people down because they have a different opinion than you. That I have proof of and it is so not called for. Agree to disagree without personal attacks.
No, I really can't remember a time when I heard a female admit she was wrong and actually believed it.
Anyway..... gibson, I would like to get him in orange, no homo, I would think we can find room for an athlete like him. Especially if we take him as a wide receiver who could be moved to QB if needed. (just to switch this whole debate around)
Start out at WR and QB is an option if the position loses depth to transfer/injury? I might be able to go for that. As I have said my biggest issue is the idea of taking 3 who would line up as QBs day 1 at UT. 1st concern is IF you take a 3rd, do you lose one or both the other guys committed. 2nd concern is the appearance it gives to the 2016 QBs. Yes, I get it that 6 months to a year after they get to UT they could be moved to other positions. That would not help with landing a guy in 2016 though. Actually it makes it worse. Both "ATH's" end up switching spots and no guy in 2016 and your back trying to get 2-3 in a class in 2017.