Jump to content

Hammerlock3

Members
  • Posts

    2,310
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    12

Everything posted by Hammerlock3

  1. I'm not aware of any college level experience, beyond his stellar athletic career of course.
  2. you give off the horrible impression of someone who stumbled upon the complexity of the world late and is now talking about it like they were the first.
  3. so are you saying no one back out on verbal commitments, or that it doesn't matter if they do?
  4. unless he didn't want people to think he backed out on his verbal....
  5. because if the position wasn't being leveraged corruptly it might have gone to someone else.
  6. Fair enough on question #1 #2 why couldn't he verbal to Minny and then change his mind? J Rob's comments don't make any sense unless he did verbal and back out.
  7. so you think hiring a recruits father at a pivotal time is ok if they are "qualified"(according to who and for what would be my quetion), but not if they aren't? And I can't speak for headshuck, but how can you justify saying he "clearly" made it up?
  8. forgive me for asking a question from the suspicious corner of my mind, but you seem skeptical about pretty much every claim of sleazy recruiting practices in this thread, is that the case?
  9. now that you mention it, i remember something like that doing down.
  10. well i didn't reference that myself, in fact i hadn't heard it, i was referring to what headshuck said. If I had to guess, I'd bet headshuck had some knowledge of Hall giving a verbal commitment and not living up to it.
  11. yeah they're all on staff....no i was referring to what headsuck alluded to, the practice of recruiting committed kids. And i shouldn't have called out PSU its common practice.
  12. PSU does that constantly. Nolf has talked about it, Kerk committed to two school before PSU...
  13. was there ever a more blatant example of corruption than when they recruited him right as they gave his dad a job.....
  14. As soon as I read the tweet i imagined some old korean lady stepping over the collapsed body of a gassed out downey in the frozen food section.
  15. Yeah I hope I don't seen argumentative or repetitive, but athletes could be treated differently based on evidence, like in a courtroom, but when you're dealing with a bureaucracy its more likely the discrimination is based on perceived trends, image and risk mitigation.
  16. oh man if only he'd known about sequencing back in the day.....all those matches he tried something and it didn't work so he just quit for the rest of the match would have been way different.
  17. i would assume so. Seems like a lot of these guys would compete on one day every 18 months if they could get away with it.
  18. he's more clutch than Brooks or sanderson...also had a lot more practice at it.
  19. yeah but is there any reason to assume thats what the decision was based on
  20. sanderson's motion was way better (best ever), he knew way way way more positions, his forward pressure didn't require standing on train tracks (more of a zig zag), way better on top (maybe a wash because no one is getting ridden), but the big thing to me is that he seemed reckless while always in control...the guy was scary, brook is just really good.
  21. How do you reconcile that with Sidakov and uguev remaining on the team? Is there a differentiation in Sad's support from theirs? As I alluded to above it looks like they wanted to make a statement without showing any courage.
×
×
  • Create New...