ADVERTISEMENT

Best QBs are home-grown

You understand the difference between a coincidence and a cause and effect relationship, right? It's like saying the team that won the world series had a shortstop who hit .230, so our shortstop should be hitting .230.

Clemson, who hasn't believe in/used the transfer portal, has dominated the ACC. That's why the winner hasn't had a transfer: The one team worth a damn hasn't taken transfers. In the years when they didn't have a 1st round pick under center it's cost them those seasons, and their fans are pissed. Sure, they were still good enough to win the ACC.

When FSU wins the conference with a transfer QB, maybe we can squash this debate. There's a good chance next year's winner also has a transfer QB.
FSU's QB has been at the school for 5 years. You don't get much more home-grown than that.

The point is that top QBs haven't transferred to ACC schools. There is nothing to indicate that will change.
 
It’s a combination of not enough NIL being ponied up for even mediocre recruits and transfers (the better ones want thousands merely to give you a visit now), and the national reputation Pitt now has for having a bad OC and the HC saying … multiple times … that he outright hates exciting offense.

This in only three years since we had a Heisman finalist QB and a bilitnikoff WR. But that’s how fast and cynical things are in this sport. Hire a terrible OC and boast that you want to win every game 11-10, then this is what you are going to get … guys like Jurk and Reynolds
LOL. what a joke.
 
FSU's QB has been at the school for 5 years. You don't get much more home-grown than that.

The point is that top QBs haven't transferred to ACC schools. There is nothing to indicate that will change.

There actually is:

1) Dabo said they're going to start taking transfers, and I doubt they're going to play this Klubnik game much longer - he's just not that good

2) FSU is back and Travis will be gone

3) UNC is losing Maye, and that's a pretty attractive offense if they need a transfer

And we'll see about Miami, but King was certainly viewed as one of the top transfers a few years ago.
 
There actually is:

1) Dabo said they're going to start taking transfers, and I doubt they're going to play this Klubnik game much longer - he's just not that good

2) FSU is back and Travis will be gone

3) UNC is losing Maye, and that's a pretty attractive offense if they need a transfer

And we'll see about Miami, but King was certainly viewed as one of the top transfers a few years ago.
Bla bla bla bla bla bla.

Let me know when it happens. Until then ... it hasn't.
 
Pitt should be innovative and eliminate the quarterback positon.
 
Bla bla bla bla bla bla.

Let me know when it happens. Until then ... it hasn't.

It's happening right now with Florida State. But that one doesn't count for some reason.

Mmmkay, let's roll with the Penn Hills kid who makes Jurkovec look like Chris Kyle.
 
Bla bla bla bla bla bla.

Let me know when it happens. Until then ... it hasn't.


Tell everyone why the ACC would be unique in this across the college football landscape and your argument will make sense.

Otherwise you're just someone who doesn't understand the difference between correlation and causation.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BFo8
Tell everyone why the ACC would be unique in this across the college football landscape and your argument will make sense.

Otherwise you're just someone who doesn't understand the difference between correlation and causation.
It isn't my argument. I didn't write the article.
 
So you are saying that you don't understand the meaning of what you posted?

Yeah, that does make sense.
I seem to understand more than you. I understand that I have said nothing that wasn't said in the article in order to point out the inanity of those arguing with its premise.

Why don't you tell me why the ACC has not been able to get a top-flight QB transfer in? It hasn't happened yet, but you clowns seem to think the past is meaningless and something magical will happen to change that. If you can explain that magic, then your argument will make sense.
 
I seem to understand more than you. I understand that I have said nothing that wasn't said in the article in order to point out the inanity of those arguing with its premise.

Why don't you tell me why the ACC has not been able to get a top-flight QB transfer in? It hasn't happened yet, but you clowns seem to think the past is meaningless and something magical will happen to change that. If you can explain that magic, then your argument will make sense.


The best team in the ACC this season has a transfer playing quarterback.

And again, answer this simple question. What is it about the ACC that would somehow make it inherently different than every other conference in the country? Because that's what you are agreeing with here, that there is something about the ACC that makes it so that if we ignore what we are seeing this very season that there is something that somehow makes the ACC different.

Like I said, you just don't understand the difference between correlation and causation.
 
The best team in the ACC this season has a transfer playing quarterback.

And again, answer this simple question. What is it about the ACC that would somehow make it inherently different than every other conference in the country? Because that's what you are agreeing with here, that there is something about the ACC that makes it so that if we ignore what we are seeing this very season that there is something that somehow makes the ACC different.

Like I said, you just don't understand the difference between correlation and causation.
He was not a top QB when he transferred in and is in his 5th year at FSU. You can technically call him a transfer but someone at a school 5 years is effectively home-grown, as the article points out.

If you want the question answered, ask the author of the article. If you want to talk correlation and causation, talk with him. But you have not even attempted to disprove his argument other than to say "nyah nyah, you're wrong".
 
He was not a top QB when he transferred in and is in his 5th year at FSU. You can technically call him a transfer but someone at a school 5 years is effectively home-grown, as the article points out.

If you want the question answered, ask the author of the article. If you want to talk correlation and causation, talk with him. But you have not even attempted to disprove his argument other than to say "nyah nyah, you're wrong".


I want the question answered by the guy who is defending the article who is here talking about it.

The fact that you won't answer the question shows that deep down inside, and really, probably not all that deeply, you know that his argument makes no sense what so ever. You won't answer the question because there isn't actually an answer for it.
 
I want the question answered by the guy who is defending the article who is here talking about it.

The fact that you won't answer the question shows that deep down inside, and really, probably not all that deeply, you know that his argument makes no sense what so ever. You won't answer the question because there isn't actually an answer for it.
I've defended the premise of the article at all. You really don't understand the thread.

You still haven't said a thing that makes me believe the article is wrong. You're all wishful thinking.
 
You still haven't said a thing that makes me believe the article is wrong. You're all wishful thinking.


Seeing as to how you obviously aren't very bright that's easy to understand.

Once again, what is it about the ACC that if we ignore this year that makes it so that transfer quarterbacks can be successful in every other conference in the country but not in the ACC.

The article is wrong because it logically makes no sense. The fact that neither you nor the author of the article understand the difference between coincidence and cause doesn't mean that I am engaging in wishful thinking, it means that you (and the author of the article) aren't very smart. Certainly not nearly as smart as you think you are.
 
Seeing as to how you obviously aren't very bright that's easy to understand.

Once again, what is it about the ACC that if we ignore this year that makes it so that transfer quarterbacks can be successful in every other conference in the country but not in the ACC.

The article is wrong because it logically makes no sense. The fact that neither you nor the author of the article understand the difference between coincidence and cause doesn't mean that I am engaging in wishful thinking, it means that you (and the author of the article) aren't very smart. Certainly not nearly as smart as you think you are.
Are you so dumb that you just keep repeating the nonsense over and over?

The article points out the facts. You have no facts on your side. You only have wishful thinking.

I'm done. You're too tedious to deal with.
 
Are you so dumb that you just keep repeating the nonsense over and over?

The article points out the facts. You have no facts on your side. You only have wishful thinking.

I'm done. You're too tedious to deal with.


I have the fact that the quarterback for the best team in the ACC this year is, in fact, a transfer. No matter how many times you and the author want to hand wave that fact away.

I also have the fact that there is nothing inherently different about the ACC than every other conference in the country with regards to transfers on my side, and the fact that you won't even attempt to address that fact because you know that it's true and you also know that admitting that it's true makes your whole argument look silly.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT