GASO Prediction Thread

ee8384 said:
You mean OUR POINTS.

Score requires two numbers: winner points & loser points.
Click to expand...

BuzzCzar said:
No, i mean our score

Did we just score? What was that team's score? Who scored? How many points did we score?

You are just plain wrong on that, imo, as the examples above show

One would never say, we pointed 24 points, you would say "score"

Our score was 35
Click to expand...


pubs-bars-pedantic-pedant-nit_picking-chats-conversations-kmhn57_low.jpg
 
BuzzCzar said:
No, i mean our score

Did we just score? What was that team's score? Who scored? How many points did we score?

You are just plain wrong on that, imo, as the examples above show

One would never say, we pointed 24 points, you would say "score"

Our score was 35
Click to expand...

So when someone comes up to you and says, "What's the score?" your response is a single number. "We're winning. 24."
 
ee8384 said:
So when someone comes up to you and says, "What's the score?" your response is a single number. "We're winning. 24."
Click to expand...

It can mean BOTH things... as is often the case with english

Whats the score?
We are winning by 7

Thats one number (for example)
 
From the definition:

score
skôr/
noun
  1. 1.
    the number of points, goals, runs, etc., achieved in a game by a team or an individual.

Seems like not only are you wrong but you are the one being nitpicky and pedantic
 
BuzzCzar said:
Seems like not only are you wrong but you are the one being nitpicky and pedantic
Click to expand...

Sure I'm being nit-picky and pedantic. Why do you think I jumped into this thread after it should have been long dead? Is there anything too nit-picky and pedantic for you to argue about? I got what I came for.
 
no, ill keep going if you want to
or, we could start a "grammar discussion" thread.
or a uniform thread, those are pretty nit picky too
how about a thread regarding the topic of what kinds of words should be acceptable to use in Scrabble

language is a razor; it should be kept sharp
 
BuzzCzar said:
no, ill keep going if you want to
or, we could start a "grammar discussion" thread.
or a uniform thread, those are pretty nit picky too
how about a thread regarding the topic of what kinds of words should be acceptable to use in Scrabble

language is a razor; it should be kept sharp
Click to expand...

And a mind is a turrible thing.
 
coit said:
Guess what... We covered. So you were WRONG. Not the first or last time I'm sure.
Click to expand...
You sir, did not refute my argument. The defensive backs cannot cover. You did see the Miami game, I presume? You have a pattern of being an absolute jackass as evidenced by your posts and unwillingness to admit when you are wrong.
 
GT 1950 said:
You sir, did not refute my argument. The defensive backs cannot cover. You did see the Miami game, I presume? You have a pattern of being an absolute jackass as evidenced by your posts and unwillingness to admit when you are wrong.
Click to expand...

You said we wouldn't cover. You were wrong. Where was I wrong?
 
GT 1950 said:
You sir, did not refute my argument. The defensive backs cannot cover. You did see the Miami game, I presume? You have a pattern of being an absolute jackass as evidenced by your posts and unwillingness to admit when you are wrong.
Click to expand...

Some serious TIC here or you aren't sure what "cover" means...
 
GT 1950 said:
You sir, did not refute my argument. The defensive backs cannot cover. You did see the Miami game, I presume? You have a pattern of being an absolute jackass as evidenced by your posts and unwillingness to admit when you are wrong.
Click to expand...

gth874t said:
Some serious TIC here or you aren't sure what "cover" means...
Click to expand...

Oh, good point, I forgot to respond to that point. To which I had meant to say that DBs don't defend in a vacuum. I think I've "covered" it pretty well in the past when I have discussed, at length, the lack of depth we have on defense in general, and more specifically on the DL. We cannot put any pressure on the QB with our front 4. Haven't seen us be able to do it against anyone yet. As a result, Roof's plan of attack is to try to weather the first half by playing a softer zone and save the guys energy for the 2nd half.

By doing this, it serves two purposes. First, our limited depth is still good in the 2nd half. Second, Roof can make adjustments at halftime that the other team can't react to like they could if we were doing it in the first half. I think the defense's performance in the 2nd half of games has been pretty solid. If not for the tipped pass, 74 yd TD in the 4th quarter against Pitt, I would say that the defense has been a solid A in the 2nd half all year.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top