Did Reggie Ball throw the game on purpose?

Status
Not open for further replies.
beej67 said:
So what's the explanation?

I view BOR's thread here, as perhaps an attempt to say, "hey, maybe Reggie isn't absolutely and completely the worst QB ever to see the field on the flats ... maybe he did it on purpose."

How about you answer the other question:

Was gaining 11 yards on 22 attempts and giving UGA 10 points on 3 turnovers the best Reggie could do?

Answer that. Yes or No.

Because if 'Yes,' he should turn his jersey in to the trainers and work on graduating, and if 'No' then you've got some further explaining to do.
Click to expand...

1) No, that's not what BOR's aim was. If it were, he would have clarified that in his first reply after realizing how it was being taken. He meant it how it was taken, and was stupid for doing so.

2. The answer is "No." and I'm curious as to how I have some explaining to do. Reggie had a really bad game. What do I have to explain? Why a far less experienced QB wasn't put in as an experiment?
 
The idea that we are even discussing whether or not RB threw the game makes clear that this is his worst ever performance in his spotty career.

The way Reggie was yucking it up on the sideline after his last interception makes me want to believe the worst.
At the very least, RB should never take another snap at GT.
 
Jacket... you clearly cannot be this blind. I'm setting you up. You have repeatedly defended that Reggie gives us our best option to win which DEFINATELY IS NOT TRUE and you won't admit otherwise.

So either Reggie IS THAT BAD or he threw the God Damn game because siimply no one could be that bad.
 
BarrelORum said:
Jacket... you clearly cannot be this blind. I'm setting you up. You have repeatedly defended that Reggie gives us our best option to win which DEFINATELY IS NOT TRUE and you won't admit otherwise.

So either Reggie IS THAT BAD or he threw the God Damn game because siimply no one could be that bad.
Click to expand...
No, what you're trying to "set up" is the scenario in which it is an undeniable truth that regardless of the fact that the coaches played our best shot to win, Reggie's poor performance meant that there must have been someone who would have done better.

Taylor Bennet may come out and lead us to the National Title next year, but that doesn't mean that he was a better choice to play even a down in the game today.

You'd like to think that you're walking me into a trap in which my reasoning falls on top of me, but what you're doing is jumping from idea to idea hoping one sticks.
 
I give a rats ass about Bennett. I've got tunnel vision at this point.
 
Well at least I am pretty confident that playing Ball after the 3rd qtr was f*cking stupid no matter how you slice it. But you go on keeping believing that just because the coaches were playing Ball that he gives us our best chance.

When you fart, do you often smell roses?
 
Nevermind Bennett, or Garner, or Manley - I said after Clemson and I still firmly believe we would have a better offense with Mike Cox at QB.
 
BarrelORum said:
Well at least I am pretty confident that playing Ball after the 3rd qtr was f*cking stupid no matter how you slice it. But you go on keeping believing that just because the coaches were playing Ball that he gives us our best chance.

When you fart, do you often smell roses?
Click to expand...
Still absent are the pleasant-to-see logic and quite necessary proof. One or the other would be a step in the right direction for you.
 
mm42 said:
Nevermind Bennett, or Garner, or Manley - I said after Clemson and I still firmly believe we would have a better offense with Mike Cox at QB.
Click to expand...

Thanks man for interjecting a little humor. I almost fell off my chair laughing.
 
LOL, you are grasping. Let me ask you one last question genius...

So SINCE Ball was in the game and that MUST have given us our best option to win... even when he was 5-19 for 36 yards, 1 INT, 1 Fumble and looking like complete and total garbage...

How much more could it hurt to not play the other QB? Are you really handicapping your team that much more?

Or do we keep beating our heads against a brickwall expecting a different result?
 
LOL, you are grasping. Let me ask you one last question genius...

So SINCE Ball was in the game and that MUST have given us our best option to win... even when he was 5-19 for 36 yards, 1 INT, 1 Fumble and looking like complete and total garbage...

How much more could it hurt to not play the other QB? Are you really handicapping your team that much more?

Or do we keep beating our heads against a brickwall expecting a different result?
 
Oh wait let me respond with what has become standard....

Ball was in the game. So he must have given us the best chance to win. Damn I'm stupid for not grasping that.
 
Oh wait let me respond with what has become standard....

Ball was in the game. So he must have given us the best chance to win. Damn I'm stupid for not grasping that.
 
BarrelORum said:
LOL, you are grasping. Let me ask you one last question genius...

So SINCE Ball was in the game and that MUST have given us our best option to win... even when he was 5-19 for 36 yards, 1 INT, 1 Fumble and looking like complete and total garbage...

How much more could it hurt to not play the other QB? Are you really handicapping your team that much more?

Or do we keep beating our heads against a brickwall expecting a different result?
Click to expand...


That is what's so sad about this. How much worse could Bennett have been. NO ONE could have been worse. So why not give Bennett a chance? Why is he sticking with this kid especially with performances like this. I just don't get it???????????????????
 
How to be BOR in four easy steps:

1) Invest too much of your self-worth in GT athletics.
2) When things aren't going our way, insinuate the most inflamatory falsehood you can think of.
3) Argue with those who aren't as delusional.
4) Repeat.

Well done! :biggthumpup:
 
Obviously you have not read the entire thread but thanks. I am unworthy.
 
BarrelORum said:
At the Miami game he was throwing his fist in the air at Tech fans who had been critical of him. Anyone who has ever met him will tell you its like he doesn't give two cents about the fans.

On the 3rd down and goal he had 3 wide open receivers at various times and he took the sack. Instead of throwing the ball away on two more occassions he took sacks. On the two point conversion, Grant was wide open on the pitch for the TD, and Reggie takes it instead.

I wouldn't have brought it up if I didn;t have two of my UGA friends make these comments to me and then I just read on the other board where someone thought the same thing.

He ain't going pro. Did he take the dive for the $$$?
Click to expand...

BOR: That's quite an imagination. Reggie took that sack because honestly he doesn't have it between the ears to have done anything differently.
 
BarrelORum said:
LOL, you are grasping. Let me ask you one last question genius...

So SINCE Ball was in the game and that MUST have given us our best option to win... even when he was 5-19 for 36 yards, 1 INT, 1 Fumble and looking like complete and total garbage...

How much more could it hurt to not play the other QB? Are you really handicapping your team that much more?

Or do we keep beating our heads against a brickwall expecting a different result?
Click to expand...
You stick with what HAS worked before and you know HAS a chance to work. Reggie could have very well led us on a game-winning drive, we have seen him lead us on big drives before.

Taylor has no such resume and would have been a shot in the dark.

Basically, you're trying to argue that your preference of rolling the dice with Taylor is the clear and far more intelligent decision, opposed to rolling them with Reggie.

I've seen Reggie perform well against Auburn, Miami, Virginia Tech, and a few other well or highly regarded schools.

I've seen Taylor perform well against Connecticut and Duke.

I'll take Reggie because he's quarterbacked from behind and to victories before.

You'll take Taylor because "Well.. why not?"

Yes, you're quite the argumentative mastermind.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top