Balsy

Just wait until you see Chapman in action.

Pretty nice interviews. Woodson looks like he has put on a few pounds. Chapman was very well spoken. Pohl recognizes he needs to be more vocal. Woodson's comments were just terrible, IMO. TB clearly stated that he wants a QB who can take the offense into the endzone. (looking at you Kyle Pohl). Just from this video I'd put KP16 and TC9 tied for first, Woodson in third.

Spin Stop that...it's annoying.

Or background electromagnetic interference from a nearby city...

Agreed. Double agree!

I don't agree. His post is more like mine. Everywhere he's gone he's been considered a TOP QB. Why on Earth would we be discussing, at this point in the game, putting him at another position? Why is that even being considered by any member here, is the point. Why does the contention exist in the first place. I agree with you that there's a chance any athlete who can play, can try another position...but only after there's considerable depth that has beaten them out and it doesn't look likely they'll ever play the position here. Even if Pohl did beat out Chapman...he has 3 years of elligibility left. It wouldn't kill us to have him behind Pohl learning the system, not learning how to play WR. JMO

Cherry picking is fun. He also threw 2 INTs, and went 3-and-out in the first three drives of the game. Argueably, La-Lafayette, Michigan could have been Ws with slightly better play from the QB. Infact the QB could have singlehandedly been the factor in BOTH those games. I really don't "disdain" Pohl, I'm just astounded at the number of times I read people on this forum wanting status quo. Kyle Pohl is status quo. I thought we wanted better than that!

UA1987 - I'm not saying he's a bad QB...but do you remember the La-Lafayette Game...the James Madison Game...the BGSU game...the other BGSU game...the Marshall game...the second Can't State game...the Can't State game where we scored a million FGs because we couldn't move the ball... The pitt game was less Pohl and more Hundley's amazing running. Hindsight is 20/20. Pohl's not horrible...but he's not the QB to get us to the next level.

If Tra'von Chapman is being put at any other position, and Pohl is our starting QB...be prepared for Zips 2013/2014.

I said "if he can play"...if he can, he doesn't need to be thrown out there in another position. But clearly I'm betting the house on this season. Bowden or Broke! Go Zips

If the Chapman Kid can play, he needs to be under center, not at WR or some other gimmick play, and not all over the place.

+1. I completely agree Skip. I think Woodson was definitely a guy Bowden hoped would evolve into the QB to run his system, if I'm not mistaken...Woodson was Bowden's first QB recruit. Clearly the QBs on the roster were not getting the job done, and they've brought in a guy to compete. I'd have to go back and look at the limited action we saw Hirschman in his time here, but it even looked like Hirschman was better at running this offense than Pohl. I don't hate Pohl...but we have to admit that he's not a Bowden guy, and the offense has never looked all that fluid with him under center.

I'm pretty confident Chapman is going to light it up! (Or gosh I hope so...)

LOVE the trolling.

It's in the OT portion of the forum...and pertains to the conference that we are in, so I don't see the problem. These are important conversations to have, because it does impact parts of Zipsnation, and our conference (agree or disagree with it) has taken a stance on it. But I'll refrain from posting on this issue anymore.

Because the reason the refuse my work IS important. The constitution protects my right to have access to the services that are available to everyone else, and to not be denied based on the grounds of descrimination (ie, an arbitrary means for saying no). I've picked them for a reason, style that they do, the job that they do, the reputation that they have and or the price. Refusing my work as an issue of conflict of scheduling, contractual obligations, than it isn't a legal issue. If they want to refuse my hiring them because I have blonde hair, blue eyes, am a jew, or a muslim, an atheist, or gay, of Itallian decent (or any other arbirtrary label) than it is not okay, and a violation of the constiution. The equal protection clause of the 14th amendment guarantees that people who are similary situated are to be similarly treated. Indiana is 1 of 26 states that has LEGAL same-sex marriage. It's not me trying to push my "Lib" beliefs onto the Hoosiers, its their own freakin law that legalized gay marriage, and it's the freakin Constitution of the United States that protects their right to have access, period. I happen to believe in the rule of law, and democracy. We're supposed to be protected, underlaw, from the biases of others in the public sphere. The constitution, is the bedrock of this idea. To use your own example: Your religious liberty is not being violated by baking cookies or cakes for a gay wedding. You're not being forced to believe something, you're just performing a service, and getting paid for it. The logical thing to do, is to just bake the darn cakes and be done with it! No political statement needs to be made. Baking cakes for a gay wedding is no more legitimizing gay marriage, than eating chinese food makes you chinese.

I don't agree. When it's a social rights political issue, it absolutely is the business of the athletic departments, and conferences that represent them. Universities have an obligation to represent the student body and athletes that they have, which includes any group that may be prejudiced by any law in another state. Not doing so is a dereliction of duty.

That's a false equivalency. And keener for your mocking of flued instead of fluid, get over yourself.

Considering that the cheerleaders are on the sidelines and noting the stands.... Id say this is very different. I think this has the potential to be something really cool and there are definitely students who will want to be involved with it. Like I said in another post on this topic earlier, this would probably to different things like pass out signs...banners...start coordinated chants which the Ak Rowdies should be doing but don't.

Well I guess this is where we differ Zipgrad01, because "Right" and "Wrong" are relative things. They don't actually exist; and if history is our measure, well "right" and "wrong" change rather fluedly. There's a dozen or so people on this forum regularly, I'd be willing to bet that if we asked all of them...all dozen or so would have different varations of what's Right and Wrong, some more similar to some than others. There's about 26,000 students at UA. If you were to ask all 26,000 about "right" and "wrong" you'd have about 26,000 different variations, some more similalar to some than others. Compromise is just about the only way you can ever trully reconcile this. Now, we could branch this conversation into a discussion about moral relativism vs moral absolutism, but that would be a little OT.

Bingo. +1.

Unfortunately, the reason I'm able to make that prediction has about 0% with being Liberal or Conservative, and just about 100% with understanding demographics, statistics and electoral trends...you know, the stuff that UA taught me.

Because, depending upon what the goal is, you want dependable students. I don't agree. This looks more like a job than a student org. I have a feeling this group would be in various locations around the stadium cordinating cheers (or something of that nature) NOT a student org that sits in one location. Perhaps something that will do stuff like cordinating a section of fans to hold up signs that say "GO ZIPS" or something of that nature? IDK, I'm certainly at least interested to see what they want to do with this before I pass judgement on it. I like it.

Considering non of the other conferences have announced a boycott...I wouldn't say thats "following" at all.