KSUFans Archives

Sports => Snyder's Electronic Cyber Space World => Topic started by: WildWillie21 on October 03, 2007, 03:00:49 PM

Title: Jack Harry on Kietz...
Post by: WildWillie21 on October 03, 2007, 03:00:49 PM
Coming up soon. This oughta be good...



(http://img468.imageshack.us/img468/4350/jmgkiddz1.jpg)   (http://www.nbcactionnews.com/sites/kshb/images/personalities/sports/jackharry.jpg)

Title: Re: Jack Harry on Kietz...
Post by: stormnut on October 03, 2007, 03:03:10 PM
Coming up soon. This oughta be good...



(http://img468.imageshack.us/img468/4350/jmgkiddz1.jpg)   (http://www.nbcactionnews.com/sites/kshb/images/personalities/sports/jackharry.jpg)



This ought to be good indeed. Although Kevin will probably make sure to keep him happy.
Title: Re: Jack Harry on Kietz...
Post by: AzCat on October 03, 2007, 03:28:02 PM
Well?
Title: Re: Jack Harry on Kietz...
Post by: stormnut on October 03, 2007, 03:32:15 PM
Well?

Jack would not go on record. He knows that ku will lose this game and won't put his name on the line.
Title: Re: Jack Harry on Kietz...
Post by: WildWillie21 on October 03, 2007, 03:35:27 PM
Very vanilla.

Kietz showed him up by playing clip of last week where he(jack) said AU was no good and UT was awsome. Jack had no comment really.

Other than that they flirted around with eachother over nubb/mizzou and a little ksu/ku.
Title: Re: Jack Harry on Kietz...
Post by: pissclams on October 03, 2007, 03:54:44 PM
jack harry said that mark mangino was going to beat KSU by using lasers.  $299 for all you want worth of lasers, KSU should be beat within 6 months.
Title: Re: Jack Harry on Kietz...
Post by: Kat Kid on October 03, 2007, 03:55:52 PM
Jack Harry is hilarious.
Title: Re: Jack Harry on Kietz...
Post by: kougar24 on October 03, 2007, 03:56:59 PM
"Perceptions and rankings are the dumbest things in the world."

 :banghead: Kietz
Title: Re: Jack Harry on Kietz...
Post by: WildWillie21 on October 03, 2007, 03:57:09 PM
Quote
I don't care

 :lol:
Title: Re: Jack Harry on Kietz...
Post by: kougar24 on October 03, 2007, 04:07:28 PM
Kietz comparing the Big XII North to the AFC West is illogical, because you don't have to recruit in the NFL.

Perceptions and rankings DO matter in recruiting.
Title: Re: Jack Harry on Kietz...
Post by: ArchE_Cat on October 03, 2007, 04:12:00 PM
Kietz also says Garth Brooks lives in Stillwater, OK....

"...thats not true!!!" - from someone who does live in Stillwater

Garth lives near Owasso, OK.
Title: Re: Jack Harry on Kietz...
Post by: Kat Kid on October 03, 2007, 04:17:47 PM
Kietz comparing the Big XII North to the AFC West is illogical, because you don't have to recruit in the NFL.

Perceptions and rankings DO matter in recruiting.

Did you hear the caller?

The caller was an idiot.  Keitzman's argument makes sense if you want to win the North division.

I tend to agree with Kietz.  I'd rather KSU dominate the division than "be competitive" in a solid division.
Title: Re: Jack Harry on Kietz...
Post by: kougar24 on October 03, 2007, 04:34:54 PM
Kietz comparing the Big XII North to the AFC West is illogical, because you don't have to recruit in the NFL.

Perceptions and rankings DO matter in recruiting.

Did you hear the caller?

The caller was an idiot.  Keitzman's argument makes sense if you want to win the North division.

I tend to agree with Kietz.  I'd rather KSU dominate the division than "be competitive" in a solid division.

I understood both points, but to say perception and rankings don't matter at all is just factually incorrect. It matters in the long run for your team to win the division in the future due to recruiting. It just does.

I'm not saying it matters as much as that caller said, but it isn't totally irrelevant even when you're only talking about winning your division.
Title: Re: Jack Harry on Kietz...
Post by: Kat Kid on October 03, 2007, 05:09:09 PM
Kietz comparing the Big XII North to the AFC West is illogical, because you don't have to recruit in the NFL.

Perceptions and rankings DO matter in recruiting.

Did you hear the caller?

The caller was an idiot.  Keitzman's argument makes sense if you want to win the North division.

I tend to agree with Kietz.  I'd rather KSU dominate the division than "be competitive" in a solid division.

I understood both points, but to say perception and rankings don't matter at all is just factually incorrect. It matters in the long run for your team to win the division in the future due to recruiting. It just does.

I'm not saying it matters as much as that caller said, but it isn't totally irrelevant even when you're only talking about winning your division.

The perception of your division's relative strength matters more than winning it?  Rankings do indeed matter, but strength of schedule is a rather small part of that.

If your point is really that having your division's strength highly thought of is needed so that you can recruit so that you can then win the division, then I don't know what to tell you.  Wouldn't having a highly thought of division mean that you were competing with more schools for the same regional kids?  I'd rather have ISU, CU, MU, NU, ku all thought of as horrible, consistently dominate the division and scoop up kids from all those schools and then worry about the South in the Championship game.
Title: Re: Jack Harry on Kietz...
Post by: ew2x4 on October 03, 2007, 05:24:20 PM
Just win, baby.
Title: Re: Jack Harry on Kietz...
Post by: kougar24 on October 03, 2007, 06:25:05 PM

The perception of your division's relative strength matters more than winning it?

I didn't say that. I simply said it's not completely irrelevant like Kietz said.
Title: Re: Jack Harry on Kietz...
Post by: Kat Kid on October 03, 2007, 06:37:00 PM

The perception of your division's relative strength matters more than winning it?

I didn't say that. I simply said it's not completely irrelevant like Kietz said.

Would you mind explaining what you did say then because I'm looking for an argument.

Did you hear the caller that Kietz was responding to?  The context really frames all of this.
Title: Re: Jack Harry on Kietz...
Post by: kougar24 on October 03, 2007, 06:43:30 PM

The perception of your division's relative strength matters more than winning it?

I didn't say that. I simply said it's not completely irrelevant like Kietz said.

Would you mind explaining what you did say then because I'm looking for an argument.

Did you hear the caller that Kietz was responding to?  The context really frames all of this.

Yes, I heard the caller, and no, you aren't getting an argument. Not this time.  :)