Addison had good numbers at Pitt in spite of not having a good QB
- Thread starter Fk_Pitt
- Start date
Thank you. I couldn’t get it to link, presumably because the link had an f-u-c-k in it and rivals was filtering it out and causing the link to be bad.
This is an example of what I've been saying for years... Just because you have a blog or get face time on TV doesn't make you smart or an expert. He's just a dweeb with a laptop...
P.S. I think Stephen Hawking was an idiot....
The reason I didn't post it is because I watched in stunned disbelief.
This seems to be a left coast reporter in the wrong time zone that never saw a Pitt game from 2016-2021.
This is how teams steal drafts, others are dumb.
This is how teams steal drafts, others are dumb.
These random guys on ESPN and the like all know a little bit about a lot of things and can usually spew something that sounds reasonable to most people. But this dude just exposed himself. At first I was thinking he was talking about 2020, but then he added more detail that clarified he was talking about 2021. No idea who he is, but he's obviously a complete dope.
pittdan77
Athletic Director
There is so much of this on the internet passing for "real" analysis. Guy probably doesn't watch games and just looks at stats. Googled the wrong year.
pittdan77
Athletic Director
ESPN is just one outfit that doesn't bother to vet content. All of the sports broadcasters are just as bad.
the only explanation is he just didnt pay attention and assumed that Slovis' was pitt's qb in '21. that's the only thing i can think of that makes any sense.
lol, i dont know temple. what he said makes zero sense, im just trying to identify the only logical explanation.
Matt Miller is either very lazy or totally incompetent.
I cannot imagine a credible sports analyst who views a Heisman finalist and a 1st round draft pick who leads his team to 10 wins and helps his receiver become the best in college football as being part of "not a very good quarterback situation."
I will always question his expert analysis in the future.
I cannot imagine a credible sports analyst who views a Heisman finalist and a 1st round draft pick who leads his team to 10 wins and helps his receiver become the best in college football as being part of "not a very good quarterback situation."
I will always question his expert analysis in the future.
I think we give too many people credit for being stupid just for the sake of views, though. I think most of them are just plain stupid. I don't think it's as calculated as we give them credit for most of the time.
Could he have meant that the incoming QB situation (Slovis) was not very good, rather than referring to KP?
Couldn't have been referring to Slovis, since they never played a down together.
