what did Lloyd Carr mean by the field having a "crown"
Mike Samuelson
"When you've been around football as long as I have, you know that in
the old fields, there's a big crown, and that field at Oregon to me
looked like an eight- to 10-inch crown, and that affects the throws to
the sidelines particularly, and I think that affected John. We haven't
played on a field with a crown like that."
What is he talking about? I've never heard of this before? I think
Navarre has a lot deeper problem than being distracted by the "crown"
on the stadium. He didn't look much better against Indiana and that
was at his home stadium. The commentators kept talking about all the
dropped balls by the WRs, but it's kind of tough when every pass is 2
feet above your head. And many of the catches they did make (against
both IU and Oregon) were amazing.
UM has, I think, one of the best (and somewhat underrated) group of
WRs in the nation and Navarre is just a so-so QB (on a good day). Many
teams (UM definitely included) like to start off with some easier
passes (screens, sidelines etc.) to get their QB warmed up. With
Navarre, they need to do the opposite, get him throwing downfield
immediately. I don't know the stats, but I think he looks much better
when he steps up into the pocket to make a 15-20 yarder straight
downfield. He looks horrible early on when he throws out to the
sidelines.
Mike
Trevor Zion Bauknight
dontbot...@hotmail.com (Mike Samuelson) wrote:
> What is he talking about? I've never heard of this before? I think
> Navarre has a lot deeper problem than being distracted by the "crown"
> on the stadium.
A crown is when the field is higher between the hash marks than it is
along the sidelines...sometimes a great deal higher. The crown at Frank
Howard Field at Clemson was at least 18". A camera set level to the
middle of the field on one sideline would show the reporter on the other
side from the waist up.
This greatly benefitted Clemson's running game, back when we used to
have one.
--
Trev
"Hypotheses are initially assumed false, by definition. Science is about
proving them true." - Daniel Seriff
Chris Stassen
> What is he talking about? I've never heard of this before?
It's the field being higher in the center and sloped towards the
sidelines, for drainage purposes.
--
Chris Stassen http://www.stassen.com/chris
NOTE: "occu...@stassen.com" is NOT a valid E-mail address
Robert St. James (el corazon del demonio)
"Mike Samuelson" <dontbot...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:cd3b6f8c.03092...@posting.google.com...
> In his post-Oregon comments, Carr said
>
> "When you've been around football as long as I have, you know that in
> the old fields, there's a big crown, and that field at Oregon to me
> looked like an eight- to 10-inch crown, and that affects the throws to
> the sidelines particularly, and I think that affected John. We haven't
> played on a field with a crown like that."
Probably a legit statement, although hardly an excuse. Autzen is very
likely crowned just because it rains so freaking much up here that if
it wasn't, OU home games would resemble water polo.
RstJ
GDer/CU'89
Scott Stearns
"Mike Samuelson" <dontbot...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:cd3b6f8c.03092...@posting.google.com...
[snipped a bunch of typical Carr Wolverweenie whining]
> Mike
Football fields do indeed have a crown. This is to help with drainage. It
doesn't show up on TV because of the angles the camera use, but supposedly
on some fields you can only see people on the other sideline from the knees
up. The ground slopes upward from sideline to middle, and meets in the
center of the field. Supposedly, this helps running teams because their
backs are running downhill.
--
Scott M. Stearns
playb...@charter.net
"Send Lawyers, Guns, and Money"
Jon Enslin
Wisconsin has a big crown on it as well. That is about as lame an
excuse as you can get.
Jon
--
"It seems all you can do is step on our collective joy whenever Canada
achieves a milestone in sports." - rob
Robert St. James (el corazon del demonio)
"Jon Enslin" <enslinjREMOVE...@uww.edu> wrote in message
news:3F7878E9...@uww.edu...
> Robert St. James (el corazon del demonio) wrote:
>
> > "Mike Samuelson" <dontbot...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > news:cd3b6f8c.03092...@posting.google.com...
> >
> >>In his post-Oregon comments, Carr said
> >>
> >>"When you've been around football as long as I have, you know that in
> >>the old fields, there's a big crown, and that field at Oregon to me
> >>looked like an eight- to 10-inch crown, and that affects the throws to
> >>the sidelines particularly, and I think that affected John. We haven't
> >>played on a field with a crown like that."
> >>
> >
> > Probably a legit statement, although hardly an excuse. Autzen is very
> > likely crowned just because it rains so freaking much up here that if
> > it wasn't, OU home games would resemble water polo.
>
>
> Wisconsin has a big crown on it as well. That is about as lame an
> excuse as you can get.
>
>
> Jon
I hope Carr wasn't offering that as a serious reason why Navarre was trying
to complete a pass that (as someone else pointed out) only 3 QBs in the world
had a chance of completing. Navarre's a decent passer, but MLB isn't pestering
him to go baseball (like they were Elway). He lofts that one into the cameramen,
Michigan maybe finds a way to win that ballgame. He didn't, and I don't think
anyone, including Carr, seriously believes it was because he miscalculated the
curvature of the field.
RstJ
GDer/CU'89
Harry Everhart
> opponent's. Because the officials make them switch sides each
> quarter, the field is on hydraulic jacks. These jacks are disguised
> as water pumps, just in case anyone asks.
Several years ago - FSU put a new special field in their stadium. It has
a vacuum drainage system. The field drains so well - that you can play a
game almost immediately after days of rain. The field is virtually flat
- there is no crown.
Funny story - it reminds of a game I attended at Penn State about 8
years ago against Rutgers. The announcers were bragging about the new
turf "designed" by the Penn State Horticulture Department or something
that that. It started to rain and the field started coming up in giant
clumps. It looked like the players were surfing out there on flat
boards. What a mess!
The mess was only beaten by the mess in the parking lot. I never saw
such mud. I was just happy to not be driving that night. Since there is
only one road out of the stadium area - 110,000 fans must leave the area
single file on this "road." During a night game a couple years back
against Miami - cars were parading by my motor home as late as 4 am.
What a poorly designed - stadium - field - parking lot - road plan.
Since it all happened on Paterno's watch - they are all his fault too.
Jefferson N. Glapski
news:MPG.19e20b05f...@news.randori.com...
> Mike Samuelson wrote:
> > What is he talking about? I've never heard of this before?
>
> It's the field being higher in the center and sloped towards the
> sidelines, for drainage purposes.
And outside running game purposes, too.
--
Jefferson N. Glapski
http://www.glapski.com
Jefferson N. Glapski
>
> > "Mike Samuelson" <dontbot...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > news:cd3b6f8c.03092...@posting.google.com...
> >
> >>In his post-Oregon comments, Carr said
> >>
> >>"When you've been around football as long as I have, you know that in
> >>the old fields, there's a big crown, and that field at Oregon to me
> >>looked like an eight- to 10-inch crown, and that affects the throws to
> >>the sidelines particularly, and I think that affected John. We haven't
> >>played on a field with a crown like that."
> >>
> >
> > Probably a legit statement, although hardly an excuse. Autzen is very
> > likely crowned just because it rains so freaking much up here that if
> > it wasn't, OU home games would resemble water polo.
>
>
> Wisconsin has a big crown on it as well. That is about as lame an
> excuse as you can get.
Same with Beaver Stadium. 10 inches doesn't seem that much.
Bryan S. Slick
[Mon, 29 Sep 2003 21:18:44 GMT]
:> I understand that FSU's field also slopes downhill towards the endzone
:> opponent's. Because the officials make them switch sides each
:> quarter, the field is on hydraulic jacks. These jacks are disguised
:> as water pumps, just in case anyone asks.
:
:Several years ago - FSU put a new special field in their stadium. It has
:a vacuum drainage system. The field drains so well - that you can play a
:game almost immediately after days of rain. The field is virtually flat
:- there is no crown.
If you watched this year's Hurricane Bowl, you saw said system (or one
very much like it) in action in Blacksburg.
--
Bryan S. Slick, bryan_s at slick-family dot net
"To those who have fought for it,
freedom has a flavor the protected will never know."
Jon Enslin
> Same with Beaver Stadium. 10 inches doesn't seem that much.
If someone read *just* this line, they may think this is some kind of
pron chatroom...
Jon
--
RSFC foster-fan of the Mighty Ole Miss Rebels.
2002 Independence Bowl Champs!!!!
Three Time National Champion (1959, 1960, 1962)
Sean S
this on me:
> Same with Beaver Stadium. 10 inches doesn't seem that much.
10 inches in Beaver seems plenty to me.
Sean
--
This space for rent.
Jefferson N. Glapski
news:3F78CAA1...@REMOVEATYOUROWNRISKcharter.net...
> "Jefferson N. Glapski" wrote:
>
> > Same with Beaver Stadium. 10 inches doesn't seem that much.
>
> If someone read *just* this line, they may think this is some kind of
> pron chatroom...
In that case....about 18" seems to be about the norm. You can't even see
your knees on the other sideline.
Bryan S. Slick
[Tue, 30 Sep 2003 00:55:41 GMT]
:> If someone read *just* this line, they may think this is some kind of
:> pron chatroom...
:
:
:In that case....about 18" seems to be about the norm. You can't even see
:your knees on the other sideline.
I'd HOPE that my knees were on the same sideline from which I'd be
looking. I damn sure wouldn't want to see them on the OTHER one.
lein
> "Chris Stassen" <occu...@stassen.com> wrote in message
> news:MPG.19e20b05f...@news.randori.com...
>> Mike Samuelson wrote:
>> > What is he talking about? I've never heard of this before?
>>
>> It's the field being higher in the center and sloped towards the
>> sidelines, for drainage purposes.
>
>
> And outside running game purposes, too.
>
Especially when you run the wishbone back in the 70s/80s and played in the
Big 8.
--
John Leinaweaver
lein
> Robert St. James (el corazon del demonio) wrote:
>
>> "Mike Samuelson" <dontbot...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:cd3b6f8c.03092...@posting.google.com...
>>
>>>In his post-Oregon comments, Carr said
>>>
>>>"When you've been around football as long as I have, you know that in
>>>the old fields, there's a big crown, and that field at Oregon to me
>>>looked like an eight- to 10-inch crown, and that affects the throws to
>>>the sidelines particularly, and I think that affected John. We haven't
>>>played on a field with a crown like that."
>>>
>>
>> Probably a legit statement, although hardly an excuse. Autzen is very
>> likely crowned just because it rains so freaking much up here that if
>> it wasn't, OU home games would resemble water polo.
>
>
> Wisconsin has a big crown on it as well. That is about as lame an
> excuse as you can get.
Perhaps Lloyd should get a clue, if Michigan Stadium had a crown, the field
condition wouldn't have been so pathetic last season.
--
John Leinaweaver
T O'B
historical significance around here?:
spent a couple million putting in this neato drainage system one year,
then crowned the field the next. Only problem was, the crown made all
the water run off to the side of the field instead of down into the neato
drains, so the players were standing in 6 inches of water on the
sidelines if it rained. About 10 years they kept fucking with it. If
only they'd sucked up their pride and called the doods who can put a
grass field indoors, they'd have had a good field in 1995 or so. Alas,
they didn't. And now they have this old tires and nylon shit.
--
TO
Vijay Ramanujan
<thisspaceintent...@ameritech.gnet> wrote:
> If
> only they'd sucked up their pride and called the doods who can put a
> grass field indoors, they'd have had a good field in 1995 or so. Alas,
> they didn't. And now they have this old tires and nylon shit.
I don't know details, but I thought the folks at MSU were supervising
the UM field installation and/or maintenance.
Vijay R.
Trevor Zion Bauknight
lo...@victor.com (Lone Victor) wrote:
> >Football fields do indeed have a crown. This is to help with drainage. It
> >doesn't show up on TV because of the angles the camera use, but supposedly
> >on some fields you can only see people on the other sideline from the knees
> >up. The ground slopes upward from sideline to middle, and meets in the
> >center of the field. Supposedly, this helps running teams because their
> >backs are running downhill.
>
> I understand that FSU's field also slopes downhill towards the endzone
> opponent's.
It is a tradition that Tennessee's field is quite a bit higher at one
end than at the other, and that there are rocks in the turf.
Dave Reid
> Wisconsin has a big crown on it as well. That is about as lame an
> excuse as you can get.
I remember that excuse being trotted out in the mid-90's as to why
Brett Farve and the Packers couldn't win at Texas Stadium.
dave
Trent Woodruff
>>Mike Samuelson wrote:
>> What is he talking about? I've never heard of this before?
>It's the field being higher in the center and sloped towards the
>sidelines, for drainage purposes.
Drainage purposes, my ass. Them Oklahoma bastards used to have about
a 3-foot crown (it was said that it was difficult to see the legs of
the opposing players on the sidelines)...that allowed them to
literally "run downhill" on their outside option plays.
Trent
Chairborne "Nine of Diamonds" Ranger
...To be a great NCO, you need three bones: a backbone, a wishbone and a funny bone.
Donn Miller
> The mess was only beaten by the mess in the parking lot. I never saw
> such mud. I was just happy to not be driving that night. Since there is
> only one road out of the stadium area - 110,000 fans must leave the area
> single file on this "road." During a night game a couple years back
> against Miami - cars were parading by my motor home as late as 4 am.
> What a poorly designed - stadium - field - parking lot - road plan.
>
> Since it all happened on Paterno's watch - they are all his fault too.
Sounds like those roads could use an overhaul. Also, I'm not sure
College Ave. is laid out very well, either... it looks like it could
use a third lane for busses. Everytime I drive through State College,
I'm afraid I might sideswipe a student standing in front of the driver
side of a bus.
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----
Jon Enslin
This Packer fan would like to think that's the case, but knows better.
Mike Samuelson
> along the sidelines...sometimes a great deal higher. The crown at Frank
> Howard Field at Clemson was at least 18". A camera set level to the
> middle of the field on one sideline would show the reporter on the other
> side from the waist up.
I see, thanks. That's a poor excuse. Unless Michigan Stadium also has
a crown and, for some reason, no one ever told Navarre about it, cause
his high and off-target sideline passes are chronic. I wonder what %
of his interceptions have been to the sideline vs. down the middle.
Mike
lein
It's always someone else's fault with the Michigan faithful, be it the
Oregon crown, the MSU clock operator, or fans simply cheering on their team.
If I hire someone to do work on my house/car/etc. I am the supervisor and
the person I'm paying to do the work is the supervisee.
--
John Leinaweaver
Vijay Ramanujan
<boomer_...@my-deja.com> wrote:
So you disagree with the PSU faithful who say "it ain't Joe Pa's fault!"
Vijay R.
lein
Vijay Ramanujan
<jo...@spammer.die> wrote:
> Who's paying Joe?
It's a public school. Taxpayer money is paying joe.
It's your fault. It's my fault. It's my responsibility.
I say fire Joe and bring in Bob Davie.
Vijay R.
Jefferson N. Glapski
news:011020030808043935%vij...@cybernex.net...
Are you serious, and thus stupid, or merely joking?
If the former:
First, any coach that would accept employment at PSU if the winningest coach
was FIRED would be second-grade at best. No good coach would want to coach
under that AD.
Second, Bob Davie? Are you kidding? Did you forget about Notre Dame? His
background at Pitt also helps too.
Evil
> Robert St. James (el corazon del demonio) wrote:
>
> > "Mike Samuelson" <dontbot...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > news:cd3b6f8c.03092...@posting.google.com...
> >
> >>In his post-Oregon comments, Carr said
> >>
> >>"When you've been around football as long as I have, you know that in
> >>the old fields, there's a big crown, and that field at Oregon to me
> >>looked like an eight- to 10-inch crown, and that affects the throws to
> >>the sidelines particularly, and I think that affected John. We haven't
> >>played on a field with a crown like that."
> >>
> >
> > Probably a legit statement, although hardly an excuse. Autzen is very
> > likely crowned just because it rains so freaking much up here that if
> > it wasn't, OU home games would resemble water polo.
>
>
> Wisconsin has a big crown on it as well. That is about as lame an
> excuse as you can get.
>
Vijay Ramanujan
Jefferson N. Glapski <jeffers...@PENNSTATEglapski.com> wrote:
> "Vijay Ramanujan" <vij...@cybernex.net> wrote in message
> news:011020030808043935%vij...@cybernex.net...
> > In article <Xns9406DF3...@204.127.204.17>, lein
> > <jo...@spammer.die> wrote:
> >
> > > Who's paying Joe?
> >
> > It's a public school. Taxpayer money is paying joe.
> >
> > It's your fault. It's my fault. It's my responsibility.
> >
> > I say fire Joe and bring in Bob Davie.
>
>
> Are you serious, and thus stupid, or merely joking?
>
> If the former:
>
> First, any coach that would accept employment at PSU if the winningest coach
> was FIRED would be second-grade at best. No good coach would want to coach
> under that AD.
Exactly. But Bob Davie isn't a good coach, so that is irrelevant.
> Second, Bob Davie? Are you kidding? Did you forget about Notre Dame? His
> background at Pitt also helps too.
I did not forget about his stint at Notre Dame. In fact, it is exactly
that track record that I would like to see exported to another team
that Michigan plays regularly.
Vijay R.
Jefferson N. Glapski
Hence, the rationale to get rid of Joe...
Vijay Ramanujan
Jefferson N. Glapski <jeffers...@PENNSTATEglapski.com> wrote:
> > I did not forget about his stint at Notre Dame. In fact, it is exactly
> > that track record that I would like to see exported to another team
> > that Michigan plays regularly.
>
>
> Hence, the rationale to get rid of Joe...
Just for accuracy's sake:
Davie's winning %age against Michigan > Paterno's winning %age against
Michigan.
Sorry.
Vijay R.
Jefferson N. Glapski
You forgot to adjust for Honig et al.
Vijay Ramanujan
You forgot to keep your stats and your bait separated.
But just for the record:
Davie 1997-2002: 58.3%
Paterno: 1998-2003: 57.4%
Vijay R.
M-Wolverine
Heck, if you take out the bye weeks Penn State was given as a gift by
the Big Ten on their entry into the League, I'd say Michigan's
undefeated against PSU... ;)
Chris C.
Jefferson N. Glapski
news:86ac6ac0.03100...@posting.google.com...
Check out Michigan's record with bye weeks.
Alan Mundy
news:65b76b4.03100...@posting.google.com:
That's cold.
--
Alan Mundy
Vijay Ramanujan
> You forgot to adjust for Honig et al.
Is he the guy who stopped the clock for Penn State when Tony Johnson
faked an injury?
Vijay R.
Vijay Ramanujan
Meanest thing I've ever said on this group.
Vijay R.
P.S. that was supposed to read 1997-2001 vs. 1999-2003.
Jefferson N. Glapski
1. PSU lost that game.
2. It actually fucked up their substitutions, and cost time.
3. I hope TJ sits out the first quarter for that bullshit. That attitude
does not contribute to winning. It contributes to taking shortcuts on the
field and in life. (No, I don't think it's 25% as bad as beating someone
with a bottle.)
Vijay Ramanujan
Absolutely. And even that isn't half as bad as a racially motivated
assault on a cop.
Ya, two can play that game.
Vijay R.
Trent Woodruff
>But just for the record:
>Davie 1997-2002: 58.3%
>Paterno: 1998-2003: 57.4%
Ouch.
Jefferson N. Glapski
Sure, let's keep playing. Casey wasn't indicted, and successfully settled
after suing the cops for a wrongful arrest. Meanwhile, Jackson pled guilty.
G-I-L-L-T-Y guilty.
Vijay Ramanujan
Cite ANY evidence that Jackson plead guilty to any crime which involved
a bottle. Assuming you can't, I expect a retraction. Or I'll just put
it down to either bitterness or a willingness on your part to let your
rooting interest turn you into a liar.
Vijay R.
Jefferson N. Glapski
There is no doubt Jackson pled guilty to assault.
Jackson says he didn't use a bottle. The victim maintains he did. The victim
didn't change his story. Jackson changed his story several times. I know who
has the credibility between the two. I don't need proof beyond a reasonable
doubt. I am not sending Jackson to the Big House, so it won't weigh on my
conscience. He's already there.
lein
When he's in the Big House, they could put him in one of those isolation
units where he has to listen to silence and think about his misdeeds.
--
John Leinaweaver
Vijay Ramanujan
That's not true. In fact, it's a flat out lie.
The victim changed two CRITICAL elements of his story, one after it
became patently obvious that he was lying and the other only after the
plea was worked out. But since that doesn't make the case against
Jackson worse than it actually is, you ignore it.
Vijay R.
Jefferson N. Glapski
Why would an innocent man plead guilty?
Jefferson N. Glapski
news:Xns9408BD4...@204.127.199.17...
And they throw marshmallows on you too.
Vijay Ramanujan
Are you changing the question because you know you were wrong before or
beccause you forgot what you said before?
Vijay R.
Jefferson N. Glapski
Why aren't you answering the question? And please cite your allegations that
the victim changed his story about Jackson using a bottle.
And while your at it, show what a Wolverine sycophant the victim is too.
But regardless, Jackson pled guilty to assault. Guilty. Doesn't matter how
he kicked the shit out of his victim, just matters that he did. And that he
pled guilty. You know, the opposite of innocent.
Vijay Ramanujan
Jefferson N. Glapski <jeffers...@PENNSTATEglapski.com> wrote:
> "Vijay Ramanujan" <vij...@cybernex.net> wrote in message
> news:021020032233168745%vij...@cybernex.net...
> > In article <558b8a4311496373...@news.teranews.com>,
> > Jefferson N. Glapski <jeffers...@PENNSTATEglapski.com> wrote:
> >
> > > > > Jackson says he didn't use a bottle. The victim maintains he did.
> The
> > > victim
> > > > > didn't change his story.
> > > >
> > > > That's not true. In fact, it's a flat out lie.
> > > >
> > > > The victim changed two CRITICAL elements of his story, one after it
> > > > became patently obvious that he was lying and the other only after the
> > > > plea was worked out. But since that doesn't make the case against
> > > > Jackson worse than it actually is, you ignore it.
> > >
> > > Why would an innocent man plead guilty?
> >
> > Are you changing the question because you know you were wrong before or
> > beccause you forgot what you said before?
>
>
> Why aren't you answering the question? And please cite your allegations that
> the victim changed his story about Jackson using a bottle.
I am pretty damn sure you are smarter than this so I'm just going to
assume you are being intentionally misleading.
First you said he attacked someone with a bottle and plead guilty.
VERY misleading. He insisted all along that he never used a bottle and
plead guilty to a lesser charge that was consistent with an unarmed
blow.
Second, you said the victim never changed his story (no mention of
bottle) and now only want evidence of changing his story on the bottle?
If you'd show a shred of honesty in this discussion I'd point the
MULTIPLE SIGNIFICANT LIES the victim told, but not while you're lying
your way through it.
> And while your at it, show what a Wolverine sycophant the victim is too.
>
> But regardless, Jackson pled guilty to assault. Guilty.
But not what you said he plead to earlier, which is why I question your
honesty.
> Doesn't matter how
> he kicked the shit out of his victim,
More misleading bullshit. One punch != "kicked the shit out of".
Vijay R.
M-Wolverine
But I wasn't saying give Michigan a bye week...just take them away
from PSU, and look what happens? Michigan doesn't need a bye week to
beat PSU....
Apparently no one else needs one anymore either....6 straight wins
isn't going to look so good when Minnesota matches it...
-Chris C.
M-Wolverine
Give it up...he doesn't know the facts, or more likely, doesn't want
to know the facts. Because that would take away the thing he likes to
harp on in replacement of actually being able to beat anyone on the
field.
-Chris C.
Are all Penn State fans like this? I didn't see Nebraska fans last
year, ND fans now, etc., etc., feel the embarrassing need to take
shots at other programs to cover up the inadequacy of their own at the
time. How can an "East Coast bias" team feel so slighted and
insecure? :)
Jefferson N. Glapski
You were saying bye weeks are important to a team's success. Michigan's
losses to lesser teams after a bye week indicates this isn't the case.
Jefferson N. Glapski
news:<021020032233168745%vij...@cybernex.net>...
> > In article <558b8a4311496373...@news.teranews.com>,
> > Jefferson N. Glapski <jeffers...@PENNSTATEglapski.com> wrote:
> >
> > > > > Jackson says he didn't use a bottle. The victim maintains he did.
The
> > victim
> > > > > didn't change his story.
> > > >
> > > > That's not true. In fact, it's a flat out lie.
> > > >
> > > > The victim changed two CRITICAL elements of his story, one after it
> > > > became patently obvious that he was lying and the other only after
the
> > > > plea was worked out. But since that doesn't make the case against
> > > > Jackson worse than it actually is, you ignore it.
> > >
> > >
> > > Why would an innocent man plead guilty?
> >
> > Are you changing the question because you know you were wrong before or
> > beccause you forgot what you said before?
> >
> > Vijay R.
>
>
> Give it up...he doesn't know the facts, or more likely, doesn't want
> to know the facts. Because that would take away the thing he likes to
> harp on in replacement of actually being able to beat anyone on the
> field.
Keep avoiding the question.
> Are all Penn State fans like this? I didn't see Nebraska fans last
> year, ND fans now, etc., etc., feel the embarrassing need to take
> shots at other programs to cover up the inadequacy of their own at the
> time. How can an "East Coast bias" team feel so slighted and
> insecure? :)
Who's feeling insecure? It's disgusting that Jackson was allowed to play.
You saw much the same thing when Phillips got a free pass a Nebraska.
Vijay Ramanujan
Jefferson N. Glapski <jeffers...@PENNSTATEglapski.com> wrote:
> You were saying bye weeks are important to a team's success.
Absurd. He wasn't that general in his statement and you know it.
Vijay R.
Vijay Ramanujan
Jefferson N. Glapski <jeffers...@PENNSTATEglapski.com> wrote:
> Keep avoiding the question.
That does seem to be your m.o., now that penn State's slide has driven
you to outright dishonesty.
Vijay R.
jbird
"Jefferson N. Glapski" wrote:
>
>
> Who's feeling insecure? It's disgusting that Jackson was allowed to play.
> You saw much the same thing when Phillips got a free pass a Nebraska.
>
What if Jackson wasn't convicted but was expelled instead for violating
University rules?
PP PP
PP PP PP tt tt
PP PP PP tt tt
PP PP tttttt ttttttt
PP PP ii ttt ttt
PP ii ii it tt tt tt tt
PP iii iii ttt tt
Vijay Ramanujan
> "Jefferson N. Glapski" wrote:
> >
> >
> > Who's feeling insecure? It's disgusting that Jackson was allowed to play.
> > You saw much the same thing when Phillips got a free pass a Nebraska.
> >
>
> What if Jackson wasn't convicted but was expelled instead for violating
> University rules?
Does the expulsion start after kickoff or before. I'd say that's the
real issue. If it's after, then he's good to go.
Vijay R.
Jefferson N. Glapski
It all depends on his guilt.
Jefferson N. Glapski
I note you continue to avoid the question: why would an innocent man plead
guilty?
--
Vijay Ramanujan
Jefferson N. Glapski <jeffers...@PENNSTATEglapski.com> wrote:
> "Vijay Ramanujan" <vij...@cybernex.net> wrote in message
> news:031020031604023322%vij...@cybernex.net...
> > In article <df7ee6d3c23c7153...@news.teranews.com>,
> > Jefferson N. Glapski <jeffers...@PENNSTATEglapski.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Keep avoiding the question.
> >
> > That does seem to be your m.o., now that penn State's slide has driven
> > you to outright dishonesty.
>
>
> I note you continue to avoid the question: why would an innocent man plead
> guilty?
How about you restate what you accused him of pleading guilty to and
I'll restate that you're a liar for saying he plead guilty to it.
How about that instead?
Vijay R.
Jefferson N. Glapski
He also insisted at the beginning that he never met the victim. Jackson's
credibility is shot, so don't attempt to use that.
On the pleading to a lesser charge, that doesn't mean its consistent with an
unarmed blow in the least. The nature of the evidence (in this case, drunk
people) can also effect how the prosecution proceeds with a case.
Eric Hicks admitted to hitting a WOMAN with a bottle, thru his brother.
http://www.cincypost.com/2003/05/20/uchoop05-20-2003.html
He was indicted on a misdemeanor.
http://www.cincypost.com/2003/06/27/uchoop06-27-2003.html
(Note that the other student athlete received a suspended sentence for
beating the snot out of someone with a baseball bat.)
> Second, you said the victim never changed his story (no mention of
> bottle) and now only want evidence of changing his story on the bottle?
Way before: first time Jackson has alcohol charge
http://www.freep.com/sports/umich/marlin16_20030916.htm
Before: victim mentions bottle
http://www.mlive.com/news/aanews/index.ssf?/base/news-5/1059748802283590.xml
http://www.michigandaily.com/vnews/display.v/ART/2003/08/04/3f2e132f5e307
After: victim still mentions bottle
http://www.freep.com/news/latestnews/pm15871_20030813.htm
Note that Marlin Jackson denied ever meeting the victim. He began lying from
the start.
Note that the victim is a "fan" of Jackson's:
"He's a student, he's a football player, sometimes people get drunk,"
Farokhrny said. "I'll be rooting for him."
Sure doesn't sound like someone who's out to get Jackson.
> If you'd show a shred of honesty in this discussion I'd point the
> MULTIPLE SIGNIFICANT LIES the victim told, but not while you're lying
> your way through it.
Shoot.
> > And while your at it, show what a Wolverine sycophant the victim is too.
> >
> > But regardless, Jackson pled guilty to assault. Guilty.
>
> But not what you said he plead to earlier, which is why I question your
> honesty.
He was charged with two counts of assault. He pled guilty to one of those
charges. Ergo, he is guilty of assault. Why would an innocent man plead
guilty to something?
> > Doesn't matter how
> > he kicked the shit out of his victim,
>
> More misleading bullshit. One punch != "kicked the shit out of".
Think, Vijay. One punch != 17 stitches and 3 cuts around his eye. 3 cuts,
not one.
How many stitches can you reasonably expect from getting smacked with a
bottle?
http://www.theindependent.com/stories/070303/new_assault03.shtml (20-25)
http://www.mountainpridemedia.org/oitm/issues/1991/0708July_Aug1991/hate.html
(5, with wound in same place as it was in Jackson's case)
http://archives.tcm.ie/irishexaminer/2001/11/10/story16873.asp (13)
http://www.cincypost.com/2003/05/20/uchoop05-20-2003.html (5)
17 cuts seems very reasonable for an attack with a bottle. 3 cuts is
completely unreasonable for one punch with a ring.
Vijay Ramanujan
Jefferson N. Glapski <jeffers...@PENNSTATEglapski.com> wrote:
> > Second, you said the victim never changed his story (no mention of
> > bottle) and now only want evidence of changing his story on the bottle?
>
> Way before: first time Jackson has alcohol charge
> http://www.freep.com/sports/umich/marlin16_20030916.htm
Totally different case. Irrelevant. Nice try, though.
Notice how you absolutely positive refuse to defend your original
assertion, the one that I called you a liar for making.
> Before: victim mentions bottle
> http://www.mlive.com/news/aanews/index.ssf?/base/news-5/1059748802283590.xml
> http://www.michigandaily.com/vnews/display.v/ART/2003/08/04/3f2e132f5e307
>
> After: victim still mentions bottle
> http://www.freep.com/news/latestnews/pm15871_20030813.htm
You lying asshole, would you please go back to what you originally said
and can't back up, that the victim never changed his story? The fact
that the victim was consistent on one point does not mean he never
changed his story.
Hell, I can play that game.
Marlin Jackson told the police his name was Marlin. After questioning,
he still said his name was Marlin. To this day, he insists his name is
Marlin. HE NEVER CHANGED HIS STORY.
WOO_HOO!!!!
You said the victim never changed his story. That is absolutely not
true. It was a lie on your part. When I called you on it, you changed
it to the much milder assertion that he never changed the bottle part
of it.
> Note that Marlin Jackson denied ever meeting the victim. He began lying from
> the start.
The victim originally said he didn't know who Marlin Jackson was and
couldn't identify him, even though it later turns out that has a prior
history with Jackson.
Note that the victim originally said that he had no altercation at the
party with Jackson and that Jackson came up to him (out of the blue)
and whacked him with a bottle, but later admitted that he and Jackson
did in fact get into an argument at the party (and that's when he got
hit).
Let's recap:
Farokhny says he didn't know Jackson.
Jackson says he didn't know Farokhny.
Turns out they are both lying and they knew each other.
So, according to you, Jackson can't be trusted because he's a liar but
we should take everything Farokhny says as the gospel and judge Jackson
on that.
Hypocrite.
> Note that the victim is a "fan" of Jackson's:
Who had never heard of him, according to his original story.
> He was charged with two counts of assault. He pled guilty to one of those
> charges. Ergo, he is guilty of assault. Why would an innocent man plead
> guilty to something?
Did he plead guilty to assaulting someone with a bottle?
That's pretty much what you said, and it's not true, liar.
> > > Doesn't matter how
> > > he kicked the shit out of his victim,
> >
> > More misleading bullshit. One punch != "kicked the shit out of".
>
> Think, Vijay. One punch != 17 stitches and 3 cuts around his eye.
Yes it does when the person doing the punching is known to wear a
rather gaudy ring. Your medical evidence is unconvincing.
Vijay R.
Donn Miller
>
>>In article <Xns9406DF3...@204.127.204.17>, lein
>><jo...@spammer.die> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Who's paying Joe?
>>
>>It's a public school. Taxpayer money is paying joe.
>>
>>It's your fault. It's my fault. It's my responsibility.
>>
>>I say fire Joe and bring in Bob Davie.
>
>
>
> Are you serious, and thus stupid, or merely joking?
Actually, Penn State relies more on private funds than most other state
universities in the Big Ten, if I'm not mistaken. It's not a public
school, but a state-related university.
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----
Jefferson N. Glapski
> In article <0c5fc2ea7dd86208...@news.teranews.com>,
> Jefferson N. Glapski <jeffers...@PENNSTATEglapski.com> wrote:
>
> > > Second, you said the victim never changed his story (no mention of
> > > bottle) and now only want evidence of changing his story on the
bottle?
> >
> > Way before: first time Jackson has alcohol charge
> > http://www.freep.com/sports/umich/marlin16_20030916.htm
>
> Totally different case. Irrelevant. Nice try, though.
Totally different case? Irrelevant? Then why do Carr and Martin talk about
Jackson having no prior offenses as part of the rationale for their deciding
on "punishment?"
> Notice how you absolutely positive refuse to defend your original
> assertion, the one that I called you a liar for making.
"Chief Assistant Washtenaw County Prosecutor Joe Burke said Farokhrny
requested the plea agreement on Wednesday before the hearing.
"He said they are both students and he wanted Jackson to be punished for the
assault but didn't want him to lose the opportunity for his education,"
Burke said. "The victim said he believes he was hit with a bottle and I have
no reason to disbelieve the victim's version of events."
http://www.freep.com/sports/umich/um14_20030814.htm
> > Before: victim mentions bottle
> >
http://www.mlive.com/news/aanews/index.ssf?/base/news-5/1059748802283590.xml
> >
http://www.michigandaily.com/vnews/display.v/ART/2003/08/04/3f2e132f5e307
> >
> > After: victim still mentions bottle
> > http://www.freep.com/news/latestnews/pm15871_20030813.htm
>
> You lying asshole, would you please go back to what you originally said
> and can't back up, that the victim never changed his story? The fact
> that the victim was consistent on one point does not mean he never
> changed his story.
Cite something.
> Hell, I can play that game.
> Marlin Jackson told the police his name was Marlin. After questioning,
> he still said his name was Marlin. To this day, he insists his name is
> Marlin. HE NEVER CHANGED HIS STORY.
>
> WOO_HOO!!!!
Of course, he lied to police with regards to the story from day 1. Sure, he
never lied about his name. He lied about a crucial part of the case.
> You said the victim never changed his story. That is absolutely not
> true. It was a lie on your part. When I called you on it, you changed
> it to the much milder assertion that he never changed the bottle part
> of it.
If it ain't true, cite.
> > Note that Marlin Jackson denied ever meeting the victim. He began lying
from
> > the start.
>
> The victim originally said he didn't know who Marlin Jackson was and
> couldn't identify him, even though it later turns out that has a prior
> history with Jackson.
He couldn't identify him at the start. What prior history did he have?
Please cite.
> Note that the victim originally said that he had no altercation at the
> party with Jackson and that Jackson came up to him (out of the blue)
> and whacked him with a bottle, but later admitted that he and Jackson
> did in fact get into an argument at the party (and that's when he got
> hit).
From opening a door in Marlin Jackson's face. Does this qualify as an
altercation?
> Let's recap:
> Farokhny says he didn't know Jackson.
> Jackson says he didn't know Farokhny.
> Turns out they are both lying and they knew each other.
> So, according to you, Jackson can't be trusted because he's a liar but
> we should take everything Farokhny says as the gospel and judge Jackson
> on that.
>
> Hypocrite.
Where did the victim say he didn't know the assaulter? Cite, please.
> > Note that the victim is a "fan" of Jackson's:
>
> Who had never heard of him, according to his original story.
Cite this. Not that I don't believe this. Farokhrny probably felt an insane
amount of pressure from fellow students who made his life a living hell.
> > He was charged with two counts of assault. He pled guilty to one of
those
> > charges. Ergo, he is guilty of assault. Why would an innocent man plead
> > guilty to something?
>
> Did he plead guilty to assaulting someone with a bottle?
> That's pretty much what you said, and it's not true, liar.
I said he pled guilty to assault. That is true. That assault included a
bottle. Jackson says no, but has no credibility.
"Chief Assistant Washtenaw County Prosecutor Joe Burke said Farokhrny
requested the plea agreement on Wednesday before the hearing.
"He said they are both students and he wanted Jackson to be punished for the
assault but didn't want him to lose the opportunity for his education,"
Burke said. "The victim said he believes he was hit with a bottle and I have
no reason to disbelieve the victim's version of events."
http://www.freep.com/sports/umich/um14_20030814.htm
> > > > Doesn't matter how
> > > > he kicked the shit out of his victim,
> > >
> > > More misleading bullshit. One punch != "kicked the shit out of".
> >
> > Think, Vijay. One punch != 17 stitches and 3 cuts around his eye.
>
> Yes it does when the person doing the punching is known to wear a
> rather gaudy ring. Your medical evidence is unconvincing.
Why did you edit the following sentence:
"17 cuts seems very reasonable for an attack with a bottle. 3 cuts is
completely unreasonable for one punch with a ring."
And you have the audacity to question my honesty? You snip shit to create a
strawman by portraying that I didn't say something.
You don't get 3 cuts with ONE punch with ONE ring. Well, unless you are
holding a Heineken in your hand at the time.