Author Topic: Hey Guys  (Read 37179 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline AU_Tigers

  • Combo-Fan
  • **
  • Posts: 502
    • View Profile
Re: Hey Guys
« Reply #225 on: September 09, 2014, 11:34:34 PM »


 :lol: We sell 'em all out. That's who we are.

Sure you do buddy, sure you do. Who could really possible sell out 50k seats all the time?
 :dunno:

Offline bones129

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 12132
  • RUN! Tell all the other curs the Law's coming!
    • View Profile
Re: Hey Guys
« Reply #226 on: September 09, 2014, 11:36:24 PM »


 :lol: We sell 'em all out. That's who we are.

Sure you do buddy, sure you do. Who could really possible sell out 50k seats all the time?
 :dunno:

Look it up, my friend. Look it up. Haven't found that curl-up cousin yet?

Offline AU_Tigers

  • Combo-Fan
  • **
  • Posts: 502
    • View Profile
Re: Hey Guys
« Reply #227 on: September 09, 2014, 11:38:07 PM »


 :lol: We sell 'em all out. That's who we are.

Sure you do buddy, sure you do. Who could really possible sell out 50k seats all the time?
 :dunno:

Look it up, my friend. Look it up. Haven't found that curl-up cousin yet?

Sarcasm is "a sharp, bitter, or cutting expression or remark; a bitter gibe or taunt."[1][2] Sarcasm may employ ambivalence,[3] although sarcasm is not necessarily ironic.[4] "The distinctive quality of sarcasm is present in the spoken word and manifested chiefly by vocal inflections".[5] The sarcastic content of a statement will be dependent upon the context in which it appears.[6]

Origin of the term
The word comes from the Greek ????????? (sarkasmos) which is taken from ????????? meaning "to tear flesh, bite the lip in rage, sneer".[1]

It is first recorded in English in 1579, in an annotation to The Shepheardes Calender by Edmund Spenser:

Tom piper, an ironicall Sarcasmus, spoken in derision of these rude wits, whych ...[1]

However, the word sarcastic, meaning "Characterized by or involving sarcasm; given to the use of sarcasm; bitterly cutting or caustic", doesn't appear until 1695.[1]

Usage
In its entry on irony, Dictionary.com describes sarcasm thus:

In sarcasm, ridicule or mockery is used harshly, often crudely and contemptuously, for destructive purposes. It may be used in an indirect manner, and have the form of irony, as in "What a fine musician you turned out to be!," "It's like you're a whole different person now...," and "Oh... Well then thanks for all the first aid over the years!" or it may be used in the form of a direct statement, "You couldn't play one piece correctly if you had two assistants." The distinctive quality of sarcasm is present in the spoken word and manifested chiefly by vocal inflection ...[7]

Distinguishing sarcasm from banter, and referring to the use of irony in sarcasm, Bousfield writes [8] that sarcasm is:

The use of strategies which, on the surface appear to be appropriate to the situation, but are meant to be taken as meaning the opposite in terms of face management. That is, the utterance which appears, on the surface, to maintain or enhance the face of the recipient actually attacks and damages the face of the recipient. ... sarcasm is an insincere form of politeness which is used to offend one's interlocutor.

John Haiman writes: "There is an extremely close connection between sarcasm and irony, and literary theorists in particular often treat sarcasm as simply the crudest and least interesting form of irony." Also, he adds:

First, situations may be ironic, but only people can be sarcastic. Second, people may be unintentionally ironic, but sarcasm requires intention. What is essential to sarcasm is that it is overt irony intentionally used by the speaker as a form of verbal aggression.[9]

While, Henry Watson Fowler writes:

Sarcasm does not necessarily involve irony. But irony, or the use of expressions conveying different things according as they are interpreted, is so often made the vehicle of sarcasm ... The essence of sarcasm is the intention of giving pain by (ironical or other) bitter words.[10]

Understanding
Understanding the subtlety of this usage requires second-order interpretation of the speaker's or writer's intentions; different parts of the brain must work together to understand sarcasm. This sophisticated understanding can be lacking in some people with certain forms of brain damage, dementia and autism (although not always),[11] and this perception has been located by MRI in the right parahippocampal gyrus.[12][13] Research has shown that people with damage in the prefrontal cortex have difficulty understanding non-verbal aspects of language like tone, Richard Delmonico, a neuropsychologist at the University of California, Davis, told an interviewer.[14] Such research could help doctors distinguish between different types of neurodegenerative diseases, such as frontotemporal dementia and Alzheimer's disease, according to David Salmon, a neuroscientist at the University of California, San Diego.[14]

In William Brant's Critique of Sarcastic Reason,[15] sarcasm is hypothesized to develop as a cognitive and emotional tool that adolescents use in order to test the borders of politeness and truth in conversation. Sarcasm recognition and expression both require the development of understanding forms of language, especially if sarcasm occurs without a cue or signal (e.g., a sarcastic tone or rolling the eyes). Sarcasm is argued to be more sophisticated than lying because lying is expressed as early as the age of three, but sarcastic expressions take place much later during development (Brant, 2012). According to Brant (2012, 145-6), sarcasm is

(a) form of expression of language often including the assertion of a statement that is disbelieved by the expresser (e.g., where the sentential meaning is disbelieved by the expresser), although the intended meaning is different from the sentence meaning. The recognition of sarcasm without the accompaniment of a cue develops around the beginning of adolescence or later. Sarcasm involves the expression of an insulting remark that requires the interpreter to understand the negative emotional connotation of the expresser within the context of the situation at hand. Irony, contrarily, does not include derision, unless it is sarcastic irony. The problems with these definitions and the reason why this dissertation does not thoroughly investigate the distinction between irony and sarcasm involves the ideas that: (1) people can pretend to be insulted when they are not or pretend not to be insulted when they are seriously offended; (2) an individual may feel ridiculed directly after the comment and then find it humorous or neutral thereafter; and (3) the individual may not feel insulted until years after the comment was expressed and considered.

Cultural perspectives on sarcasm vary widely with more than a few cultures and linguistic groups finding it offensive to varying degrees. Thomas Carlyle despised it: "Sarcasm I now see to be, in general, the language of the devil; for which reason I have long since as good as renounced it".[16] Fyodor Dostoyevsky, on the other hand, recognized in it a cry of pain: Sarcasm, he said, was "usually the last refuge of modest and chaste-souled people when the privacy of their soul is coarsely and intrusively invaded."[17] RFC 1855, a collection of guidelines for Internet communications, includes a warning to be especially careful with it as it "may not travel well." A professional translator has advised that international business executives "should generally avoid sarcasm in intercultural business conversations and written communications" because of the difficulties in translating sarcasm.[18]

Vocal indication
In English, sarcasm is often telegraphed with kinesic/prosodic cues[19] by speaking more slowly and with a lower pitch. Similarly, Dutch uses a lowered pitch; sometimes to such an extent that the expression is reduced to a mere mumble. But other research shows that there are many ways that real speakers signal sarcastic intentions. One study found that in Cantonese, sarcasm is indicated by raising the fundamental frequency of one's voice.[20]

Punctuation
Main article: Irony punctuation
Though in the English language there is no standard accepted method to denote irony or sarcasm in written conversation, several forms of punctuation have been proposed. Among the oldest and frequently attested are the percontation point—furthered by Henry Denham in the 1580s—and the irony mark—furthered by Alcanter de Brahm in the 19th century. Both of these marks were represented visually by a ? backwards question mark (unicode U+2E2E). Each of these punctuation marks are primarily used to indicate that a sentence should be understood as ironic, but not necessarily designate sarcasm that is not ironic. By contrast, more recent proposals, such as the snark mark, or the use of a following tilde are specifically intended to denote sarcasm rather than irony.[21] A bracketed exclamation point or question mark as well as scare quotes are also sometimes used to express irony or ironic sarcasm.[22]

In certain Ethiopic languages, sarcasm and unreal phrases are indicated at the end of a sentence with a sarcasm mark called temherte slaq, a character that looks like an inverted exclamation point ¡.[23] The usage directly parallels John Wilkins' 1668 proposal to use the inverted exclamation point as an irony mark.[24] A proposal by Asteraye Tsigie and Daniel Yacob in 1999 to include the temherte slaq in unicode was unsuccessful.[25]

Offline bones129

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 12132
  • RUN! Tell all the other curs the Law's coming!
    • View Profile
Re: Hey Guys
« Reply #228 on: September 09, 2014, 11:41:34 PM »
What in the original eff?

Offline EMAWesome

  • Katpak'r
  • ***
  • Posts: 1113
    • View Profile
Re: Hey Guys
« Reply #229 on: September 09, 2014, 11:59:25 PM »


 :lol: We sell 'em all out. That's who we are.

Sure you do buddy, sure you do. Who could really possible sell out 50k seats all the time?
 :dunno:

Look it up, my friend. Look it up. Haven't found that curl-up cousin yet?

Sarcasm is "a sharp, bitter, or cutting expression or remark; a bitter gibe or taunt."[1][2] Sarcasm may employ ambivalence,[3] although sarcasm is not necessarily ironic.[4] "The distinctive quality of sarcasm is present in the spoken word and manifested chiefly by vocal inflections".[5] The sarcastic content of a statement will be dependent upon the context in which it appears.[6]

Origin of the term
The word comes from the Greek ????????? (sarkasmos) which is taken from ????????? meaning "to tear flesh, bite the lip in rage, sneer".[1]

It is first recorded in English in 1579, in an annotation to The Shepheardes Calender by Edmund Spenser:

Tom piper, an ironicall Sarcasmus, spoken in derision of these rude wits, whych ...[1]

However, the word sarcastic, meaning "Characterized by or involving sarcasm; given to the use of sarcasm; bitterly cutting or caustic", doesn't appear until 1695.[1]

Usage
In its entry on irony, Dictionary.com describes sarcasm thus:

In sarcasm, ridicule or mockery is used harshly, often crudely and contemptuously, for destructive purposes. It may be used in an indirect manner, and have the form of irony, as in "What a fine musician you turned out to be!," "It's like you're a whole different person now...," and "Oh... Well then thanks for all the first aid over the years!" or it may be used in the form of a direct statement, "You couldn't play one piece correctly if you had two assistants." The distinctive quality of sarcasm is present in the spoken word and manifested chiefly by vocal inflection ...[7]

Distinguishing sarcasm from banter, and referring to the use of irony in sarcasm, Bousfield writes [8] that sarcasm is:

The use of strategies which, on the surface appear to be appropriate to the situation, but are meant to be taken as meaning the opposite in terms of face management. That is, the utterance which appears, on the surface, to maintain or enhance the face of the recipient actually attacks and damages the face of the recipient. ... sarcasm is an insincere form of politeness which is used to offend one's interlocutor.

John Haiman writes: "There is an extremely close connection between sarcasm and irony, and literary theorists in particular often treat sarcasm as simply the crudest and least interesting form of irony." Also, he adds:

First, situations may be ironic, but only people can be sarcastic. Second, people may be unintentionally ironic, but sarcasm requires intention. What is essential to sarcasm is that it is overt irony intentionally used by the speaker as a form of verbal aggression.[9]

While, Henry Watson Fowler writes:

Sarcasm does not necessarily involve irony. But irony, or the use of expressions conveying different things according as they are interpreted, is so often made the vehicle of sarcasm ... The essence of sarcasm is the intention of giving pain by (ironical or other) bitter words.[10]

Understanding
Understanding the subtlety of this usage requires second-order interpretation of the speaker's or writer's intentions; different parts of the brain must work together to understand sarcasm. This sophisticated understanding can be lacking in some people with certain forms of brain damage, dementia and autism (although not always),[11] and this perception has been located by MRI in the right parahippocampal gyrus.[12][13] Research has shown that people with damage in the prefrontal cortex have difficulty understanding non-verbal aspects of language like tone, Richard Delmonico, a neuropsychologist at the University of California, Davis, told an interviewer.[14] Such research could help doctors distinguish between different types of neurodegenerative diseases, such as frontotemporal dementia and Alzheimer's disease, according to David Salmon, a neuroscientist at the University of California, San Diego.[14]

In William Brant's Critique of Sarcastic Reason,[15] sarcasm is hypothesized to develop as a cognitive and emotional tool that adolescents use in order to test the borders of politeness and truth in conversation. Sarcasm recognition and expression both require the development of understanding forms of language, especially if sarcasm occurs without a cue or signal (e.g., a sarcastic tone or rolling the eyes). Sarcasm is argued to be more sophisticated than lying because lying is expressed as early as the age of three, but sarcastic expressions take place much later during development (Brant, 2012). According to Brant (2012, 145-6), sarcasm is

(a) form of expression of language often including the assertion of a statement that is disbelieved by the expresser (e.g., where the sentential meaning is disbelieved by the expresser), although the intended meaning is different from the sentence meaning. The recognition of sarcasm without the accompaniment of a cue develops around the beginning of adolescence or later. Sarcasm involves the expression of an insulting remark that requires the interpreter to understand the negative emotional connotation of the expresser within the context of the situation at hand. Irony, contrarily, does not include derision, unless it is sarcastic irony. The problems with these definitions and the reason why this dissertation does not thoroughly investigate the distinction between irony and sarcasm involves the ideas that: (1) people can pretend to be insulted when they are not or pretend not to be insulted when they are seriously offended; (2) an individual may feel ridiculed directly after the comment and then find it humorous or neutral thereafter; and (3) the individual may not feel insulted until years after the comment was expressed and considered.

Cultural perspectives on sarcasm vary widely with more than a few cultures and linguistic groups finding it offensive to varying degrees. Thomas Carlyle despised it: "Sarcasm I now see to be, in general, the language of the devil; for which reason I have long since as good as renounced it".[16] Fyodor Dostoyevsky, on the other hand, recognized in it a cry of pain: Sarcasm, he said, was "usually the last refuge of modest and chaste-souled people when the privacy of their soul is coarsely and intrusively invaded."[17] RFC 1855, a collection of guidelines for Internet communications, includes a warning to be especially careful with it as it "may not travel well." A professional translator has advised that international business executives "should generally avoid sarcasm in intercultural business conversations and written communications" because of the difficulties in translating sarcasm.[18]

Vocal indication
In English, sarcasm is often telegraphed with kinesic/prosodic cues[19] by speaking more slowly and with a lower pitch. Similarly, Dutch uses a lowered pitch; sometimes to such an extent that the expression is reduced to a mere mumble. But other research shows that there are many ways that real speakers signal sarcastic intentions. One study found that in Cantonese, sarcasm is indicated by raising the fundamental frequency of one's voice.[20]

Punctuation
Main article: Irony punctuation
Though in the English language there is no standard accepted method to denote irony or sarcasm in written conversation, several forms of punctuation have been proposed. Among the oldest and frequently attested are the percontation point—furthered by Henry Denham in the 1580s—and the irony mark—furthered by Alcanter de Brahm in the 19th century. Both of these marks were represented visually by a ? backwards question mark (unicode U+2E2E). Each of these punctuation marks are primarily used to indicate that a sentence should be understood as ironic, but not necessarily designate sarcasm that is not ironic. By contrast, more recent proposals, such as the snark mark, or the use of a following tilde are specifically intended to denote sarcasm rather than irony.[21] A bracketed exclamation point or question mark as well as scare quotes are also sometimes used to express irony or ironic sarcasm.[22]

In certain Ethiopic languages, sarcasm and unreal phrases are indicated at the end of a sentence with a sarcasm mark called temherte slaq, a character that looks like an inverted exclamation point ¡.[23] The usage directly parallels John Wilkins' 1668 proposal to use the inverted exclamation point as an irony mark.[24] A proposal by Asteraye Tsigie and Daniel Yacob in 1999 to include the temherte slaq in unicode was unsuccessful.[25]


Offline skycat

  • Katpak'r
  • ***
  • Posts: 1143
    • View Profile
Re: Hey Guys
« Reply #230 on: September 10, 2014, 12:10:04 AM »
I think AU_Tigers is a J sock. Alright J, the jig's up.

Offline AU_Tigers

  • Combo-Fan
  • **
  • Posts: 502
    • View Profile
Re: Hey Guys
« Reply #231 on: September 10, 2014, 12:23:54 AM »
I think AU_Tigers is a J sock. Alright J, the jig's up.

What does the 'J' reference?

Offline AU_Tigers

  • Combo-Fan
  • **
  • Posts: 502
    • View Profile
Re: Hey Guys
« Reply #232 on: September 10, 2014, 12:32:08 AM »
What in the world is this abomination???????

[attachment deleted by admin]

Offline skycat

  • Katpak'r
  • ***
  • Posts: 1143
    • View Profile
Re: Hey Guys
« Reply #233 on: September 10, 2014, 12:34:43 AM »
I think AU_Tigers is a J sock. Alright J, the jig's up.

What does the 'J' reference?

A poster on this board who goes on extended random copy-paste freakouts.

Offline AU_Tigers

  • Combo-Fan
  • **
  • Posts: 502
    • View Profile
Re: Hey Guys
« Reply #234 on: September 10, 2014, 12:40:06 AM »
I think AU_Tigers is a J sock. Alright J, the jig's up.

What does the 'J' reference?

A poster on this board who goes on extended random copy-paste freakouts.
:lol:

Offline AU_Tigers

  • Combo-Fan
  • **
  • Posts: 502
    • View Profile
Re: Hey Guys
« Reply #235 on: September 10, 2014, 01:15:38 AM »
Rob Pate: A solid effort

I saw a very solid effort last Saturday in Auburn’s 59-13 victory over San Jos State, an opponent that challenged maturity and put the onus on the Tigers to play inspired football.-

At the beginning of any season I am always on the search for signs of alarming concern - selfishness, mental weakness, lack of effort and fight, poor fundamentals, apathy, division - all traits capable of taking the most talented teams and destroying all hope for success. Often, these repugnant characteristics do not manifest until difficulties arise.

When times are good, we learn little about our character. When times are tough, our character is revealed. That's what made the Arkansas test in week one so eye-opening. A challenge was presented; the response was undeniable. We had a team with resolve, grit and fight. That will always be enough for me.

San Jose State was not talented enough or deep enough to present the same physical challenge Arkansas did. The test the Spartans offered was a mental trial in preparation, consistency and the opportunity to display the maturity of a team that respects all opponents and plays above the level of the competition as opposed to in-sync with it.

Yes, there were some miscues and areas that will require attention and improvement, but this team dismantled San Jose State in workmanlike fashion. We can quibble about minutia and nitpick plays certain individuals should have made, but the reality is this team ran roughshod over an inferior opponent in a manner of which we should be proud.

What I liked:’

* Red zone defense. I was not surprised to see San Jose State move the ball between the 20s. We played base, vanilla defense predominately and rotated several guys into the mix. San Jose State entered the red zone three times, never scoring a touchdown. That's enormous improvement compared to Week 1, when Arkansas was 3-for-3 on scoring touchdowns in the red zone. Playing superb, stingy defense when it matters most will play a critical role in this team playing for championships.

* Offensive line play. A nice continuity seems to have developed along the front as this unit has manhandled two consecutive defensive fronts. The competition will rise, but this group will become more cohesive and nasty as well. Quarterbacks have time. Running backs have lanes. The line of scrimmage is consistently moved forward. J.B. Grimes continues to show his worth.

* Creating turnovers. I remember a season not so long ago in which the Auburn defense went an entire season garnering but one interception. This secondary is still a work in progress, but the desire and demand for turnovers is obvious and an essential building block toward success.

* Quan Bray's punt return. Chris Davis set a very high standard last season returning punts (and field goal attempts just shy of the crossbar!). For the last several years prior to Davis, it seemed Auburn was content to just field punts and put little pressure on opposing punt teams. Gus Malzahn has not settled for mediocrity in this area. Quan has looked both comfortable and determined to improve field position and gain difficult yards to set up the offense. Glad to see him take one to the house.

* Montravius Adams. He played both fast and powerfully, overwhelming the San Jose State interior to wreak havoc on the Spartan offense. He is a special talent and Coach (Rodney) Garner continues to help him unveil that talent on Saturdays. We have lots of bodies along our defensive front, but none as capable as Adams.

* Crowd Noise. It appeared the crowd came and did its part to help energize this football team. I was hoping to not see an abundance of empty upper deck seats as the ESPN camera circled the stadium. From my vantage point, the Auburn faithful did not disappoint.

* No letdown from the backups. In years past, when the second unit entered the game, it was quite obvious. Production fell off and mistakes abounded. Not in this contest. Those guys never missed a beat, played relatively mistake free and continued the dominance the starters began.

What I disliked:

* Giving up the big play, especially to an enormous underdog, potentially lighting the fire of competition and a belief of success. Give up the short routes, make a tackle and force the underdog to go the distance without a mistake. Home run shots are forbidden.

* Loose secondary. Partly inexperience, partly poor technique, partly eyes in places they shouldn't be. Ultimately better quarterbacks will make us pay dearly if not tightened up.

* Inconsistency in the passing game. It was obvious the offense slowed when the staff decided it was time to get quarterback Nick Marshall active throwing the football. His decision making was sound, but his result was a bit erratic. As he did last season, he will get better every week, and the weapons he has around him will make sure that's the case. He dazzled with his feet but was average with his arm. Coach Malzahn knows he is capable of much more. This time last season I was ready to move on to the next guy. I didn't see promise in Nick's performances. By the end of the year he was the most dynamic quarterback in college football. I expect the same progress.

* ESPN's in-game "Film Room." I get the premise, but the forum was all wrong. Coach Jack Crowe and I do what they attempted every week with Game Day Bunker only we are smart enough to broadcast over a second screen for those that desire that level of insight. To hijack my television and reduce the game to secondary status was frustrating and the height of narcissism. I hope you voiced your disdain.

Not much to dislike about covering the spread for the 13th consecutive game and allowing countless numbers of young men the opportunity to help run Auburn's record to 2-0. I wondered how this team would respond to a physical challenge and they answered quite emphatically Week 1. I wondered if this team would respect an opponent it knew nothing about and was pleased with the retort.

Kansas State, a well-coached club, will be the next test in a hostile environment with the eyes of a nation looking on. Keep taking steps forward.

Offline Bqqkie Pimp

  • qoEMAW ambassador
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 6475
  • qoEMAW's official representative to goEMAW
    • View Profile
Re: Hey Guys
« Reply #236 on: September 10, 2014, 04:23:52 AM »
AUBURN – Like the head coach and the school as a whole, Kansas State plays a no-frills defense. And that defense, Auburn offensive coordinator Rhett Lashlee said Tuesday, will pose a serious challenge.


The message has gone out to Auburn players.

“We’ve been preaching to them the last two days that we have to execute at a very high level,” Lashlee said. “The way they play, they are very sound, they tackle well, they don’t beat themselves, they don’t give up big plays. They make you earn everything you get, and that’s why they’ve been so successful.”

The No. 5 Tigers (2-0) and No. 20 Wildcats (2-0) will play on Thursday night, Sept. 18, at LHC Bill Snyder Family Stadium in Manhattan. The man for whom the stadium, which seats 50,000, is named still walks the sideline. And the largest crowd in school history is expected.

The Tigers, with an open date Saturday, practiced Tuesday and will practice Wednesday and Thursday. They’ll take Friday and Saturday off before returning Sunday to begin final preparations.

“It’s big early in the year,” Lashlee said. “You have a feel for the new personnel. You have a feel for how this team is coming together. It’s still a different team than last year. You just try to have everybody as healthy as they can be.

“This is the week we have to win. We don’t play anybody. We have to win these three days and get much, much better.”

Quarterback Nick Marshall will have to operate in a loud and hostile environment, one that has gotten the best of some of the top quarterbacks in the Big 12.

“It definitely affects you,” Lashlee said. “Fortunately for us, Nick has played. A lot of our guys have played. We don’t have a young team. It’s like going into any hostile SEC environment. All I’ve heard is Manhattan is the toughest place to play in the Big 12.

"We have to be focused. We’ve been fortunate we haven’t had any false start penalties in the first two games. You attention to detail and your awareness really has to raise its level when you are on the road in a hostile environment.”

A year ago, Gus Malzahn’s first Auburn football team was trying to find itself. It eventually did, winning the SEC championship and playing in the BCS Championship Game. It’s different now.

“I think it will be a good measuring stick,” Lashlee said. “You’re going on the road and they sold it out because you’re the one they want to knock off. Boy, they have a good football team. This is not the situation we were in last year. How mature are our guys? How do we handle it?”

The coaches know what they're in for... The youngsters either don't get it, or don't believe it... yet.

 :billdance:
bears are fast...

Offline 8manpick

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 19148
  • A top quartile binger, poster, and friend
    • View Profile
Re: Hey Guys
« Reply #237 on: September 10, 2014, 07:03:34 AM »
Stop it with the copy/paste game, we all have the internet.
:adios:

Offline Bqqkie Pimp

  • qoEMAW ambassador
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 6475
  • qoEMAW's official representative to goEMAW
    • View Profile
Re: Hey Guys
« Reply #238 on: September 10, 2014, 07:28:39 AM »
Stop it with the copy/paste game, we all have the internet.

In all fairness, ol' boy warned ya with his OP to start the thread...

bears are fast...

Offline puniraptor

  • Tastemaker
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 21355
  • nostalgic reason
    • View Profile
Re: Hey Guys
« Reply #239 on: September 10, 2014, 07:29:03 AM »
What in the world is this abomination???????

ITS A SHARK


Offline Rage Against the McKee

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 37959
    • View Profile
Re: Hey Guys
« Reply #240 on: September 10, 2014, 07:39:09 AM »
It's war shark.

Offline damonismyhero

  • Fan
  • *
  • Posts: 117
    • View Profile
Re: Hey Guys
« Reply #241 on: September 10, 2014, 07:42:46 AM »
yep. good old tommy tuberville...the best coach auburn has ever had but still not good enough to coach in the big 12 and compete with kstate, baylor, oklahoma state, etc.

 :cheese:

Remember when Chizik couldn't win in the Big12 either and those car dealers and casino operators all chipped in and paid a bunch of players for him at Auburn... maybe the greatest "sCam" I've ever seen in CFB.


Offline EMAWesome

  • Katpak'r
  • ***
  • Posts: 1113
    • View Profile
Re: Hey Guys
« Reply #242 on: September 10, 2014, 08:56:44 AM »
Serious question for these "AU" supporters.

How much $$ did Nick Marshall's dad get out of your boosters in exchange for his commitment to "AU"? Also, is Mr. Marshall mad that we hurt his sons value by signing the JUCO QB we really wanted before he could leverage his negotiating position?

Thanks, I'll listen off the air.

Offline Bqqkie Pimp

  • qoEMAW ambassador
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 6475
  • qoEMAW's official representative to goEMAW
    • View Profile
Re: Hey Guys
« Reply #243 on: September 10, 2014, 09:46:49 AM »
Serious question for these "AU" supporters.

How much $$ did Nick Marshall's dad get out of your boosters in exchange for his commitment to "AU"? Also, is Mr. Marshall mad that we hurt his sons value by signing the JUCO QB we really wanted before he could leverage his negotiating position?

Thanks, I'll listen off the air.

 :popcorn:
bears are fast...

Offline MadCat

  • TIME's Person Of The Year - 2006
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 13887
    • View Profile
Re: Hey Guys
« Reply #244 on: September 10, 2014, 09:48:54 AM »

Offline puniraptor

  • Tastemaker
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 21355
  • nostalgic reason
    • View Profile
Re: Hey Guys
« Reply #245 on: September 10, 2014, 09:56:32 AM »
thats right, you see that auburn logo floating there. like a chunk of cut mackerel.

chum in the water, roll snyd

Offline meow meow

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 11380
    • View Profile
Re: Hey Guys
« Reply #246 on: September 10, 2014, 09:57:42 AM »
"All I’ve heard is Manhattan is the toughest place to play in the Big 12."  :love: :love: :love:

The word


Offline AU_Tigers

  • Combo-Fan
  • **
  • Posts: 502
    • View Profile
Re: Hey Guys
« Reply #247 on: September 10, 2014, 02:05:09 PM »
This article is so rich in irony that you could cut it with a knife. I can't wait to see the responses to this one.



How do you slow down Gus Malzahn's offensive attack?

That's the question on head coach LHC LHC Bill Snyder's mind as his Kansas State Wildcats prepare to host Auburn next Thursday night in Manhattan, Kansas.

As Auburn's former coach, Gene Chizik has insight that perhaps no other college football analyst has. During an appearance on the SEC Network Wednesday, Chizik shared three keys Kansas State needs to focus on if its expects to be successful defensively against the Tigers:

1. FOCUS ON THE TAILBACKS

"I don't think there's any question they're going to have a 1,000-yard rusher in this offense every single year as long as (they) have a quarterback runner as a threat," Chizik said.

2. DEFENDING THE QUARTERBACK WITH JUST ONE MAN DOESN'T WORK

"Particularly a defensive lineman on the zone read -- he's got no chance," Chizik said. "You always have to have what we call one and a half players. That's a half of a defensive lineman and a second-level defender that's always got to be there on the quarterback on the zone read."

3. AVOID EYE DISCIPLINE PROBLEMS

"You see it every week," he added. "They take their eyes off their keys, and now here comes the play action because everyone's so geared to stop the run that you see these vertical passing gains that go for 40, 50, 60, 70-yard touchdowns."

Chizik didn't share any predictions for the game as the segment ended, but indicated Snyder has his work cut out for him.

"No one's figured it out yet, but good luck, Bill."

One comment following this article stuck out to me:
"Have Gus report to Chiz. That'll slow it waaaaaaay down."

 :tongue:
« Last Edit: September 10, 2014, 02:12:06 PM by AU_Tigers »

Offline damonismyhero

  • Fan
  • *
  • Posts: 117
    • View Profile
Re: Hey Guys
« Reply #248 on: September 10, 2014, 02:16:36 PM »
Serious question for these "AU" supporters.

How much $$ did Nick Marshall's dad get out of your boosters in exchange for his commitment to "AU"? Also, is Mr. Marshall mad that we hurt his sons value by signing the JUCO QB we really wanted before he could leverage his negotiating position?

Thanks, I'll listen off the air.

His dad is in a coma

Offline Jabeez

  • Combo-Fan
  • **
  • Posts: 525
  • #Currie4USPrez
    • View Profile
Re: Hey Guys
« Reply #249 on: September 10, 2014, 04:21:23 PM »
What in the world is this abomination???????


This is a Aubie the Tiger?  I can see how you guys are confused