B10 reporters pick Michigan to win the B10

[kburjr]

Fair point

No, really, it was "overrated".

 

[ralphiewvu]

No, really, it was "overrated".

Meh, possibly

 

[Across The Field]

Go find and resurrect that Zach Smith thread. That one was hilarious.

Or the one where someone was arguing that Dwayne Haskins was not actually the best QB in the B1G in January of 2018 despite overwhelming evidence that he was.

 

[7Samurai13]

Or the one where someone was arguing that Dwayne Haskins was not actually the best QB in the B1G in January of 2018 despite overwhelming evidence that he was.

Except there was no such evidence.

 

[Across The Field]

Except there was no such evidence.

Must've just been a coincidence that he decisively proved it on the field a few months later then?

 

[7Samurai13]

Must've just been a coincidence that he decisively proved it on the field a few months later then?

He proved it later but playing one half of meaningful football isn’t a whole lot of evidence.

 

[MAIZEandBLUE09]

Except there was no such evidence.

If I remember that thread correctly, the argument was over Across the field suggesting that Haskins was "at least" a Heisman contender. Which turned out to be true. But at the time, it was said based entirely on potential. It would be like me claiming Patterson to be "at least" a Heisman contender this year. It's in the realm of possibility but certainly not a likely outcome.

 

[7Samurai13]

If I remember that thread correctly, the argument was over Across the field suggesting that Haskins was "at least" a Heisman contender. Which turned out to be true. But at the time, it was said based entirely on potential. It would be like me claiming Patterson to be "at least" a Heisman contender this year. It's in the realm of possibility but certainly not a likely outcome.

Absolutely he had the potential to be that, but to act like people were being homers and had blinders on to some insurmountable evidence of his greatness is just not factually correct.

 

[Across The Field]

He proved it later but playing one half of meaningful football isn’t a whole lot of evidence.

If I remember that thread correctly, the argument was over Across the field suggesting that Haskins was "at least" a Heisman contender. Which turned out to be true. But at the time, it was said based entirely on potential. It would be like me claiming Patterson to be "at least" a Heisman contender this year. It's in the realm of possibility but certainly not a likely outcome.

So... it's almost as if I knew a lot about the guy and his abilities... weird how that just happened to work out.

 

[7Samurai13]

So... it's almost as if I knew a lot about the guy and his abilities... weird how that just happened to work out.

Again, that isn’t evidence.

 

[Across The Field]

Absolutely he had the potential to be that, but to act like people were being homers and had blinders on to some insurmountable evidence of his greatness is just not factually correct.

I don't recall me calling anyone else homers. It was the exact opposite. I was chastised for saying what I said, even though I was actually right.

 

[Across The Field]

Again, that isn’t evidence.

Except it turns out I was actually right. Do you think that was just one massive coincidence?

 

[MAIZEandBLUE09]

So... it's almost as if I knew a lot about the guy and his abilities... weird how that just happened to work out.

But you could say that about any elite athlete out of HS who lands on your team's roster. Justin Fields was ranked a 5 star for a reason, but suggesting he'll make "at least" the top 3 in Heisman voting would be just as out there in terms of predictions. It was a great call by you, but the prediction was based on hope not facts at the time.

 

[7Samurai13]

Except it turns out I was actually right. Do you think that was just one massive coincidence?

Please stop being a stupid troll. Post all of the evidence that you have that Haskins was the best quarterback in the conference that predates January 2018. Again nobody questioned that he had potential to be that, but there was no EVIDENCE to state that.

 

[Across The Field]

But you could say that about any elite athlete out of HS who lands on your team's roster. Justin Fields was ranked a 5 star for a reason, but suggesting he'll make "at least" the top 3 in Heisman voting would be just as out there in terms of predictions. It was a great call by you, but the prediction was based on hope not facts at the time.

Notice I'm not making that proclamation about any other players on OSU's roster, not even Fields. Why do you suppose that is? Could it be I actually knew what I was talking about?

 

[Across The Field]

Please stop being a stupid troll. Post all of the evidence that you have that Haskins was the best quarterback in the conference that predates January 2018. Again nobody questioned that he had potential to be that, but there was no EVIDENCE to state that.

The evidence is that he was the most talented without a question. I saw what Ryan Day was able to do with JT Barrett in 2017, resurrecting his career, and Haskins was a far superior talent as a QB. We had the talent around him to succeed, and though our OL didn't play well, Haskins proved me right. It's called knowing your shit, which I clearly did.

 

[7Samurai13]

The evidence is that he was the most talented without a question. I saw what Ryan Day was able to do with JT Barrett in 2017, resurrecting his career, and Haskins was a far superior talent as a QB. We had the talent around him to succeed, and though our OL didn't play well, Haskins proved me right. It's called knowing your shit, which I clearly did.

Opinion is not evidence. Obviously you have none. There have been highly rated QBs that have tanked. Shane Morris ring any bells? You ended up being correct but you are lying that there was evidence of it.

 

[Across The Field]

Opinion is not evidence. Obviously you have none. There have been highly rated QBs that have tanked. Shane Morris ring any bells? You ended up being correct but you are lying that there was evidence of it.

There sure have been. Fact is, though, I said he was the best QB in the B1G in January. I turned out to be right. You didn't have to believe me for me to have been right, and his showing on the field certainly backed me up, unless you think he suddenly gained all of that ability he showed between February and August of last year. Which seems more likely?

 

[7Samurai13]

There sure have been. Fact is, though, I said he was the best QB in the B1G in January. I turned out to be right. You didn't have to believe me for me to have been right, and his showing on the field certainly backed me up, unless you think he suddenly gained all of that ability he showed between February and August of last year. Which seems more likely?

You know There is a difference between potential and evidence right?

 

[Across The Field]

There is a difference between potential and evidence right?

It's pretty simple:

I was right when I said he was the best QB in the B1G last January, which turned out to be correct

or

He gained Heisman/first round caliber skills between February and August

I made a statement. You choosing not to believe it doesn't mean it was wrong. I've never made a declaration like that about any other OSU player going into a season, but I had done enough research on the kid, the team, and the coaches to say that confidently, and I was dead on. You can argue semantics all you want, but the fact remains I was right.