When women cover football

[umhurricano]

http://espn.go.com/blog/acc/post/_/id/57010/weak-and-strong-miami

So perhaps this is a bit of a straw man, since it is ESPN, and probably not worthy of a thread except in the doldrums of summer, but come on.

1) Our Oline may be the best in the country, we have a bevy of solid receivers, I believe tight-end will break out, and you only need one qb and he is excellent and poised to be exceptional...yeah we have Duke, but he is but one man. RB is certainly not our best position and may be the worst, on the whole, on the offense

2) I was told by a GA that we are a) running a 3-4 next season, and b) using our secondary players as much as possible because it is our strongest group. And come on, dline is hands down bar none our weakest group.

In sum I prefer to watch Erin Andrews but not read Andrea Adelson.

 

[jruiz]

My grandmother could probably tell that adleson girl that d line is weakest position

 

[Port Knox]

Until we crack the top 100 in the country, she, or anyone else, can pick whoever they want.

 

[Cane Dynasty]

Adleson's a hack.

 

[FreeVilma]

Adelson joined ESPN.com in 2010 after spending time as a college football columnist at The Orlando Sentinel. She has covered college football since her days as a University of Florida student, and lives in Orlando, Fla.

that explains it

 

[CaneInHeelCountry]

Her job isn't to tell you numbnuts what we talk about in detail every day on this board...her job is to tell people who don't give a crap about UM and are UNC or Clemson or VT fans an idea of what's going on in our world. Give the chick a break.

 

[Dan E. Dangerously]

Her job isn't to tell you numbnuts what we talk about in detail every day on this board...her job is to tell people who don't give a crap about UM and are UNC or Clemson or VT fans an idea of what's going on in our world. Give the chick a break.

It has less to do with her being a woman, and more to do with the fact she isn't very bright.

I'd be inclined to give her a break if she weren't so dumb. She obviously doesn't know what she is talking about, otherwise she would have listed OL as our strongest position. Depth-wise outside of Duke, RB isn't that great. The fact that she didn't list DL as the clear cut worst position on the team clinched the fact that she needs to be covering women's softball and not football.

But since the ACC isn't a respected conference, the worst of the worst ESPN hacks are going to be assigned to cover it. That's how we get people like Dinich and Adelson talking about our team. If it weren't them, it'd be some other talentless schmucks.

 

[CaneInHeelCountry]

Her job isn't to tell you numbnuts what we talk about in detail every day on this board...her job is to tell people who don't give a crap about UM and are UNC or Clemson or VT fans an idea of what's going on in our world. Give the chick a break.

It has less to do with her being woman, and more to do with the fact she isn't very bright.

I'd be inclined to give her a break if she weren't a dumb ****. She obviously doesn't know what **** she is talking about, otherwise she would have listed OL as our strongest position. Depth-wise outside of Duke, RB isn't that great. The fact that she didn't list DL as the clear cut worst position on the team clinched the fact that she needs to be covering women's softball and not football.

But since the ACC isn't a respected conference, the worst of the worst ESPN hacks are going to be assigned to cover it. That's how we get people like Dinich and Adelson talking about our team. If it weren't them, it'd be some other talentless schmucks.

Good christ, whether it's ****ed up sexism or blatant stupidity, the idiocy in this thread is astounding.

Chick is right; when you have a potential Heisman candidate who put up record numbers last year at a position, that is automatically your strongest position...especially in the eyes of an objective outside observer. Seantrel and Linder look to be solid, but Seantrel in particular still hasn't lived up to the hype...while Duke has exceeded the hype.

And chick did say "Truth is, I could have chosen the defensive line, too." She gave solid reasons why she went with secondary--fewer returning starters, more uncertainty.

 

[Artist Formerly Known As]

She's still better than Herder Dernich

 

[Artist Formerly Known As]

Her job isn't to tell you numbnuts what we talk about in detail every day on this board...her job is to tell people who don't give a crap about UM and are UNC or Clemson or VT fans an idea of what's going on in our world. Give the chick a break.

It has less to do with her being woman, and more to do with the fact she isn't very bright.

I'd be inclined to give her a break if she weren't a dumb ****. She obviously doesn't know what **** she is talking about, otherwise she would have listed OL as our strongest position. Depth-wise outside of Duke, RB isn't that great. The fact that she didn't list DL as the clear cut worst position on the team clinched the fact that she needs to be covering women's softball and not football.

But since the ACC isn't a respected conference, the worst of the worst ESPN hacks are going to be assigned to cover it. That's how we get people like Dinich and Adelson talking about our team. If it weren't them, it'd be some other talentless schmucks.

Good christ, whether it's ****ed up sexism or blatant stupidity, the idiocy in this thread is astounding.

Chick is right; when you have a potential Heisman candidate who put up record numbers last year at a position, that is automatically your strongest position...especially in the eyes of an objective outside observer. Seantrel and Linder look to be solid, but Seantrel in particular still hasn't lived up to the hype...while Duke has exceeded the hype.

And chick did say "Truth is, I could have chosen the defensive line, too." She gave solid reasons why she went with secondary--fewer returning starters, more uncertainty.

The irony in you saying "blatant stupidity" and "idiocy" to Dan E.'s post while arguing RB is our strongest position is astounding. One person does not make a position. If (God forbid) Duke goes down, our RB situation is not completely ****ed, but hurt pretty **** bad. Now let's compare that to WR. If say, Dorsett, goes down, we still have Scott, Lewis, Hurns, Waters, and Coley, who is probably the best pure WR (based on potential, athleticism, and fluidity) we have on the roster. So, yeah, RB is not our best position.

[video=youtube;0MRmxfLuNto]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0MRmxfLuNto[/video]

 

[Dan E. Dangerously]

Jesus Christ, is this broad your daughter or something?

 

[CaneInHeelCountry]

Her job isn't to tell you numbnuts what we talk about in detail every day on this board...her job is to tell people who don't give a crap about UM and are UNC or Clemson or VT fans an idea of what's going on in our world. Give the chick a break.

It has less to do with her being woman, and more to do with the fact she isn't very bright.

I'd be inclined to give her a break if she weren't a dumb ****. She obviously doesn't know what **** she is talking about, otherwise she would have listed OL as our strongest position. Depth-wise outside of Duke, RB isn't that great. The fact that she didn't list DL as the clear cut worst position on the team clinched the fact that she needs to be covering women's softball and not football.

But since the ACC isn't a respected conference, the worst of the worst ESPN hacks are going to be assigned to cover it. That's how we get people like Dinich and Adelson talking about our team. If it weren't them, it'd be some other talentless schmucks.

Good christ, whether it's ****ed up sexism or blatant stupidity, the idiocy in this thread is astounding.

Chick is right; when you have a potential Heisman candidate who put up record numbers last year at a position, that is automatically your strongest position...especially in the eyes of an objective outside observer. Seantrel and Linder look to be solid, but Seantrel in particular still hasn't lived up to the hype...while Duke has exceeded the hype.

And chick did say "Truth is, I could have chosen the defensive line, too." She gave solid reasons why she went with secondary--fewer returning starters, more uncertainty.

The irony in you saying "blatant stupidity" and "idiocy" to Dan E.'s post while arguing RB is our strongest position is astounding. One person does not make a position you tard. If (God forbid) Duke goes down, our RB situation is not completely ****ed, but hurt pretty **** bad. Now let's compare that to WR. If say, Dorsett, goes down, we still have Scott, Lewis, Hurns, Waters, and Coley, who is probably the best pure WR (based on potential, athleticism, and fluidity) we have on the roster. So, yeah, RB is not our best position.

May God have mercy on your soul.

What a load of ****. Dumbasses gon' dumbass, I guess.

The question wasn't about "depth" or "potential."

Every one of the receivers you list is a question mark. Dorsett and Hurns both have potential, but both had several key stupid drops last year; Lewis and Waters combined for only 16 catches, and neither played more than half the season; and Coley hasn't even seen the field in a college game.


Now go look at the stats Duke put up. Not only did he set freshman rushing records, dude also had more catches than Lewis and Waters combined.

Based on numbers, Duke (and by default the RB position) is our best position.

 

[Aliveguy]

Her job isn't to tell you numbnuts what we talk about in detail every day on this board...her job is to tell people who don't give a crap about UM and are UNC or Clemson or VT fans an idea of what's going on in our world. Give the chick a break.

It has less to do with her being woman, and more to do with the fact she isn't very bright.

I'd be inclined to give her a break if she weren't a dumb ****. She obviously doesn't know what **** she is talking about, otherwise she would have listed OL as our strongest position. Depth-wise outside of Duke, RB isn't that great. The fact that she didn't list DL as the clear cut worst position on the team clinched the fact that she needs to be covering women's softball and not football.

But since the ACC isn't a respected conference, the worst of the worst ESPN hacks are going to be assigned to cover it. That's how we get people like Dinich and Adelson talking about our team. If it weren't them, it'd be some other talentless schmucks.

Good christ, whether it's ****ed up sexism or blatant stupidity, the idiocy in this thread is astounding.

Chick is right; when you have a potential Heisman candidate who put up record numbers last year at a position, that is automatically your strongest position...especially in the eyes of an objective outside observer. Seantrel and Linder look to be solid, but Seantrel in particular still hasn't lived up to the hype...while Duke has exceeded the hype.

And chick did say "Truth is, I could have chosen the defensive line, too." She gave solid reasons why she went with secondary--fewer returning starters, more uncertainty.

The irony in you saying "blatant stupidity" and "idiocy" to Dan E.'s post while arguing RB is our strongest position is astounding. One person does not make a position. If (God forbid) Duke goes down, our RB situation is not completely ****ed, but hurt pretty **** bad. Now let's compare that to WR. If say, Dorsett, goes down, we still have Scott, Lewis, Hurns, Waters, and Coley, who is probably the best pure WR (based on potential, athleticism, and fluidity) we have on the roster. So, yeah, RB is not our best position.

[video=youtube;0MRmxfLuNto]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0MRmxfLuNto[/video]

ONE PLAY DOES MAKE A POSITION! EX 1-4: manning, brady, rogers, brees
EX 5: Adrian Peterson

One offense, you only need one back and one qb. Those positions, one man makes all the difference in the world.

 

[CaneInHeelCountry]

Jesus Christ, is this broad your daughter or something?

Nah...but I'd **** her.

Seriously, though, the sexism crap gets a little old. Chick didn't say anything that any other sportswriter who isn't a beat writer for UM would say...but she's a "dumb ****" and we make a special thread about chick sportswriters to make fun of them. It's pretty ******* lame.

 

[Dan E. Dangerously]

k

 

[Artist Formerly Known As]

So apparently best position=best one player these days?

Best position does equal depth. Let me break that down for you. That means your deepest, most talented position from top to bottom, not best player at the top. Duke is the best player on the team, no argument here, but he doesn't make RB our strongest position. If he goes down we're sitting in a pretty ****** spot, same as if Morris went down. Those of us that have watched Canes games have noticed the potential of Scott (who many feel had one of the best springs of the entire team and who was on his way to having a great year before suspension), Lewis (who showed reliability before injury), Dorsett (who only needs to fix drops to be a stud), Waters (who flashed big play ability at the end of last year and in the spring), Hurns (who some say have had "big drops" has been the most reliable receiver and a moved the chains reliably for two years), and Coley (who has yet to prove it, but comes in as the most highly ranked WR in years). Don't even get me started on OL.

Maybe my definition of strongest position is different than yours, but I interpret that as the deepest, most talented position on the team which I feel most Canes fans who have watched a game would argue WR or OL, not RB that has one proven superstar and a senior coming of a career threatening injury, an incoming freshman, and a converted safety.

For dude who said you only need one QB and one RB, one QB is right (one QB doesn't make it the best position if he gets hurt), but if you only needed one RB, the entire NFL outside of the Vikings wouldn't be switching to running back by committee.

 

[Dan E. Dangerously]

Just realized I got called a sexist by the same guy who made it known he'd like to **** topic of OP.

 

[CaneInHeelCountry]

Just realized I got called a sexist by the same guy who made it known he'd like to **** topic of OP.

Was a joke...which is why I started the next sentence with "Seriously, though..."

 

[Dan E. Dangerously]

A sexist joke, you have to admit

 

[CaneInHeelCountry]

So apparently best position=best one player these days?

Best position does equal depth. Let me break that down for you. That means your deepest, most talented position from top to bottom, not best player at the top. Duke is the best player on the team, no argument here, but he doesn't make RB our strongest position. If he goes down we're sitting in a pretty ****** spot, same as if Morris went down. Those of us that have watched Canes games have noticed the potential of Scott (who many feel had one of the best springs of the entire team and who was on his way to having a great year before suspension), Lewis (who showed reliability before injury), Dorsett (who only needs to fix drops to be a stud), Waters (who flashed big play ability at the end of last year and in the spring), Hurns (who some say have had "big drops" has been the most reliable receiver and a moved the chains reliably for two years), and Coley (who has yet to prove it, but comes in as the most highly ranked WR in years). Don't even get me started on OL.

Maybe my definition of strongest position is different than yours, but I interpret that as the deepest, most talented position on the team which I feel most Canes fans who have watched a game would argue WR or OL, not RB that has one proven superstar and a senior coming of a career threatening injury, an incoming freshman, and a converted safety.

For dude who said you only need one QB and one RB, one QB is right (one QB doesn't make it the best position if he gets hurt), but if you only needed one RB, the entire NFL outside of the Vikings wouldn't be switching to running back by committee.

You said it..."for those of us who watched...." the players who sometimes "flashed" brilliance:...."before injury"..."showed potential".

Well, for those who've not watched UM practices, who do not follow message board chatter, etc, it would follow that they'd envision precisely what they saw last year from the WR position--a group full of potential but yet to prove that they can capitalize on that potential.

Duke and the RB position is a known commodity. End of story.

Whatever you choose, WR or RB, both are going to be strengths of this team. Neither one is technically a wrong answer. My point was that only those in the know--die hard fans and UM beat reporters, mostly--would focus on WR. Since this chick is neither a fan nor a UM beat reporter, she focused on Duke. Doesn't make her a dumb **** or a worthless reporter.