Matt Thomas and Denver Kirkland

[CANE1775]

I just think they were hoping a bowl ban this year would make sure they wouldn't miss one next year.

Ironically, this is something many recruits have mentioned, yet we have fans who say playing in the ACC Championship and Bowl Game would help with recruiting.

take the mother****ing bowl ban.

Of all people, I'm just really disappointed in our boy Able.

 

[CanesAreAble]

I just think they were hoping a bowl ban this year would make sure they wouldn't miss one next year.

Ironically, this is something many recruits have mentioned, yet we have fans who say playing in the ACC Championship and Bowl Game would help with recruiting.

take the mother****ing bowl ban.

Of all people, I'm just really disappointed in our boy Able.

:ibisroflmao:

The crux of my argument was recruiting, but I'd never heard any recruits say anything like that.

Bottom line is this situation was bungled.

 

[UMJer026]

ANd that's why we've got to take one this year.

Amen.

 

[Ajax]

I just think they were hoping a bowl ban this year would make sure they wouldn't miss one next year.

Ironically, this is something many recruits have mentioned, yet we have fans who say playing in the ACC Championship and Bowl Game would help with recruiting.

take the mother****ing bowl ban.

They're going to...also they more than likely won't be going to Charlotte either. What I dont get is why they're waiting to announce?

I would wait until after the Duke game. Even if you are going to self-impose, you still want to win that game and the kids will be more motivated if they still think a bowl and ACC championship game is a possibility. It also shows to the NCAA that you are giving up both the ACC and Bowl games as opposed to only the Bowl game which is guaranteed at this point.

 

[FreePawn]

Is every thread on this site now about the bowl ban?

 

[PowerIslam aka Sumdumgoy]

I just think they were hoping a bowl ban this year would make sure they wouldn't miss one next year.

Ironically, this is something many recruits have mentioned, yet we have fans who say playing in the ACC Championship and Bowl Game would help with recruiting.

take the mother****ing bowl ban.

They're going to...also they more than likely won't be going to Charlotte either. What I dont get is why they're waiting to announce?

Had to get to 6 wins first? Thats what I've been thinkin anyhow

 

[PowerIslam aka Sumdumgoy]

I just think they were hoping a bowl ban this year would make sure they wouldn't miss one next year.

Ironically, this is something many recruits have mentioned, yet we have fans who say playing in the ACC Championship and Bowl Game would help with recruiting.

take the mother****ing bowl ban.

 

[Plzwork4]

I just think they were hoping a bowl ban this year would make sure they wouldn't miss one next year.

Ironically, this is something many recruits have mentioned, yet we have fans who say playing in the ACC Championship and Bowl Game would help with recruiting.

take the mother****ing bowl ban.

They're going to...also they more than likely won't be going to Charlotte either. What I dont get is why they're waiting to announce?

Had to get to 6 wins first? Thats what I've been thinkin anyhow

Nah you dont have to wait. Its been done before on multiple occasions before you get to 6. We are ****ing over the ACC by waiting.

 

[Ethnicsands]

Can we get Collins back, or has that ship sailed?

I would be shocked if Miami gets him back at this point. Stranger things have happened, though

That's disappointing.

 

[Consigliere]

I just think they were hoping a bowl ban this year would make sure they wouldn't miss one next year.

Ironically, this is something many recruits have mentioned, yet we have fans who say playing in the ACC Championship and Bowl Game would help with recruiting.

take the mother****ing bowl ban.

I have seen you say over and over again [that you want to take a ban] and I respect your opinion.

But I am not inclined to do it unless we have that NOA. If then we have the NOA and it looks like there could be another ban, then I would self impose. The reason I am not inclined to do a second ban is

1. No school has self imposed twice,
2. It is only a good faith gesture and doesn't guarantee anything and
3. The President (Mark Emertt) and his crew have been giving out a lot of one year bans, it seems that one year is the thing to do (this includes UCF who had LOIC).

My point is no one knows anything and these are simply guesses. The only wrong answer is if we lost in the ACCCG, then self impose.

 

[GhostofVenice01]

I just think they were hoping a bowl ban this year would make sure they wouldn't miss one next year.

Ironically, this is something many recruits have mentioned, yet we have fans who say playing in the ACC Championship and Bowl Game would help with recruiting.

take the mother****ing bowl ban.

THIS

 

[HurricaneVision]

I just think they were hoping a bowl ban this year would make sure they wouldn't miss one next year.

Ironically, this is something many recruits have mentioned, yet we have fans who say playing in the ACC Championship and Bowl Game would help with recruiting.

take the mother****ing bowl ban.

I have seen you say over and over again [that you want to take a ban] and I respect your opinion.

But I am not inclined to do it unless we have that NOA. If then we have the NOA and it looks like there could be another ban, then I would self impose. The reason I am not inclined to do a second ban is

1. No school has self imposed twice,
2. It is only a good faith gesture and doesn't guarantee anything and
3. The President (Mark Emertt) and his crew have been giving out a lot of one year bans, it seems that one year is the thing to do (this includes UCF who had LOIC).

My point is no one knows anything and these are simply guesses. The only wrong answer is if we lost in the ACCCG, then self impose.

My response this is if you self-impose and the NCAA was only going to give you a one year ban after their findings, the fact that we gave up a potential ACC champ. game and a rematch with a big rival would have to carry some weight on the punishment that will be handed out.

There is no downside to imposing other than the impact it has on your Seniors and the loss of extra practice for the returning players.

As for your last part, we can't self-impose if we lose in the ACCCG. By that point, it's considered a post-season game and we're locked into a bowl game and lose the ability to self-impose.

You make the right choice, and you self-impose.

 

[Consigliere]

I just think they were hoping a bowl ban this year would make sure they wouldn't miss one next year.

Ironically, this is something many recruits have mentioned, yet we have fans who say playing in the ACC Championship and Bowl Game would help with recruiting.

take the mother****ing bowl ban.

I have seen you say over and over again [that you want to take a ban] and I respect your opinion.

But I am not inclined to do it unless we have that NOA. If then we have the NOA and it looks like there could be another ban, then I would self impose. The reason I am not inclined to do a second ban is

1. No school has self imposed twice,
2. It is only a good faith gesture and doesn't guarantee anything and
3. The President (Mark Emertt) and his crew have been giving out a lot of one year bans, it seems that one year is the thing to do (this includes UCF who had LOIC).

My point is no one knows anything and these are simply guesses. The only wrong answer is if we lost in the ACCCG, then self impose.

My response this is if you self-impose and the NCAA was only going to give you a one year ban after their findings, the fact that we gave up a potential ACC champ. game and a rematch with a big rival would have to carry some weight on the punishment that will be handed out.

There is no downside to imposing other than the impact it has on your Seniors and the loss of extra practice for the returning players.

As for your last part, we can't self-impose if we lose in the ACCCG. By that point, it's considered a post-season game and we're locked into a bowl game and lose the ability to self-impose.

You make the right choice, and you self-impose.

Wow.

 

[LuCane]

I just think they were hoping a bowl ban this year would make sure they wouldn't miss one next year.

Ironically, this is something many recruits have mentioned, yet we have fans who say playing in the ACC Championship and Bowl Game would help with recruiting.

take the mother****ing bowl ban.

I have seen you say over and over again [that you want to take a ban] and I respect your opinion.

But I am not inclined to do it unless we have that NOA. If then we have the NOA and it looks like there could be another ban, then I would self impose. The reason I am not inclined to do a second ban is

1. No school has self imposed twice,
2. It is only a good faith gesture and doesn't guarantee anything and
3. The President (Mark Emertt) and his crew have been giving out a lot of one year bans, it seems that one year is the thing to do (this includes UCF who had LOIC).

My point is no one knows anything and these are simply guesses. The only wrong answer is if we lost in the ACCCG, then self impose.

I get it, man. I just address most of these decisions in a cost-benefit analysis, and the costs that I personally know (recruits and players complaining about how awkward, uncomfortable, etc., it is to "not know" how badly it will affect them) outweigh any potential benefits.

 

[Consigliere]

I just think they were hoping a bowl ban this year would make sure they wouldn't miss one next year.

Ironically, this is something many recruits have mentioned, yet we have fans who say playing in the ACC Championship and Bowl Game would help with recruiting.

take the mother****ing bowl ban.

I have seen you say over and over again [that you want to take a ban] and I respect your opinion.

But I am not inclined to do it unless we have that NOA. If then we have the NOA and it looks like there could be another ban, then I would self impose. The reason I am not inclined to do a second ban is

1. No school has self imposed twice,
2. It is only a good faith gesture and doesn't guarantee anything and
3. The President (Mark Emertt) and his crew have been giving out a lot of one year bans, it seems that one year is the thing to do (this includes UCF who had LOIC).

My point is no one knows anything and these are simply guesses. The only wrong answer is if we lost in the ACCCG, then self impose.

I get it, man. I just address most of these decisions in a cost-benefit analysis, and the costs that I personally know (recruits and players complaining about how awkward, uncomfortable, etc., it is to "not know" how badly it will affect them) outweigh any potential benefits.

Like I said, I appreciate what you bring and I am really pointing out there is another side to the argument. Keep bringing the goods, I appreciate it.

 

[skyman]

Honestly there is no other side. We suck this year, no bowl is going to change that. 7-5. DO you want to be OSU next year? Better to be safe, what is the gain for going to crap bowl? Better to take hit now and if we didnt have to oh well season still sucked and most wont mind. Heck yesterday most fans would rather stay and tailgate than go inside and watch the final game. We aint losing out. Only gain. We can put this crap behind us faster, sooner. I dont get why we want to extend a season that is lost at the moment.

 

[Chrisarg72]

all should redshirt except Bryant and 6.. I only want to see like 2 or 3 freshman from 2013 play meaningful minutes. The rest need to sit and get stronger.

Golden's philosophy is simple, if they're better than the guys behind them, they'll play. I think that's the right approach. Recruits love it. Upperclassmen can't get lazy and sloppy.

So knowing what it takes to see the field, I hope you're right that only 2-3 see meaningful minutes, because that will mean our current players step up and play great ball. But I don't think you keep a guy like Thomas off the field, and probably both Carter and Burns play a lot. So that's 3 right there. One of Dobbard, Johnson and Kerr will see action. My guess is that whatever RB we finally take, he'll see the field a bunch, too. Hopefully that's it. But if Porter hurts himself again, or one of the other DL go down, we will see a Bryant, Bostwick or Williams (if he makes it in this class).

Unfortunately that first part isn't true. Jenkins > Vt, AH, KRII, yet he was red shirting

Jenkins just went through an injury that set him back and he had to work his way back up

 

[HurricaneVision]

I just think they were hoping a bowl ban this year would make sure they wouldn't miss one next year.

Ironically, this is something many recruits have mentioned, yet we have fans who say playing in the ACC Championship and Bowl Game would help with recruiting.

take the mother****ing bowl ban.

I have seen you say over and over again [that you want to take a ban] and I respect your opinion.

But I am not inclined to do it unless we have that NOA. If then we have the NOA and it looks like there could be another ban, then I would self impose. The reason I am not inclined to do a second ban is

1. No school has self imposed twice,
2. It is only a good faith gesture and doesn't guarantee anything and
3. The President (Mark Emertt) and his crew have been giving out a lot of one year bans, it seems that one year is the thing to do (this includes UCF who had LOIC).

My point is no one knows anything and these are simply guesses. The only wrong answer is if we lost in the ACCCG, then self impose.

My response this is if you self-impose and the NCAA was only going to give you a one year ban after their findings, the fact that we gave up a potential ACC champ. game and a rematch with a big rival would have to carry some weight on the punishment that will be handed out.

There is no downside to imposing other than the impact it has on your Seniors and the loss of extra practice for the returning players.

As for your last part, we can't self-impose if we lose in the ACCCG. By that point, it's considered a post-season game and we're locked into a bowl game and lose the ability to self-impose.

You make the right choice, and you self-impose.

Wow.

Safe to assume you disagree, and that's fine.

The risk/reward is clearly on the side of self-imposing...

 

[Consigliere]

Honestly there is no other side. We suck this year, no bowl is going to change that. 7-5. DO you want to be OSU next year? Better to be safe, what is the gain for going to crap bowl? Better to take hit now and if we didnt have to oh well season still sucked and most wont mind. Heck yesterday most fans would rather stay and tailgate than go inside and watch the final game. We aint losing out. Only gain. We can put this crap behind us faster, sooner. I dont get why we want to extend a season that is lost at the moment.

This OSU argument fails for many reasons and is as logical as saying if we lose in the ACCCG game then we self impose for the bowl game.

 

[Consigliere]

Ironically, this is something many recruits have mentioned, yet we have fans who say playing in the ACC Championship and Bowl Game would help with recruiting.

take the mother****ing bowl ban.

I have seen you say over and over again [that you want to take a ban] and I respect your opinion.

But I am not inclined to do it unless we have that NOA. If then we have the NOA and it looks like there could be another ban, then I would self impose. The reason I am not inclined to do a second ban is

1. No school has self imposed twice,
2. It is only a good faith gesture and doesn't guarantee anything and
3. The President (Mark Emertt) and his crew have been giving out a lot of one year bans, it seems that one year is the thing to do (this includes UCF who had LOIC).

My point is no one knows anything and these are simply guesses. The only wrong answer is if we lost in the ACCCG, then self impose.

My response this is if you self-impose and the NCAA was only going to give you a one year ban after their findings, the fact that we gave up a potential ACC champ. game and a rematch with a big rival would have to carry some weight on the punishment that will be handed out.

There is no downside to imposing other than the impact it has on your Seniors and the loss of extra practice for the returning players.

As for your last part, we can't self-impose if we lose in the ACCCG. By that point, it's considered a post-season game and we're locked into a bowl game and lose the ability to self-impose.

You make the right choice, and you self-impose.

Wow.

Safe to assume you disagree, and that's fine.

The risk/reward is clearly on the side of self-imposing...

No it means that I am shocked at what you said. Just an FYI, I am well aware that we can't self impose if we go to the ACCCG and I was making a joke.