In your eyes, is Trace:
1.)A Mount Rushmore Player
2.) The Best QB we ever had
3.) Benefit from today’s systems and squads—Sperbro
Is it a total cop out to say a combination of all of them?
Statistically (and I’m a numbers and cold hard facts girl), he’s one of the best quarterbacks in Penn State history - so how could you leave him off? He’s the winningest quarterback at the top of many of the program’s records, so you absolutely have to talk about him in the context of best QBs we’ve ever had.
But there’s no question that he is able to be in the running for numbers one and two almost explicitly because of three. There’s no way in hell that he would have been able to show as much as he did under Galen Hall, let alone John Donovan. And that’s a great thing.
Related question; How would the following have fared at the helm of the 2016-8 offense:
A healthy Zack Mills, Darryl Clark, MRob, A freed-up Rashard Casey, Shorty Miller—McCloskeywasinbounds
At the risk of losing any sort of historical Penn State cache I may have had, I know little to nothing about Shorty Miller so I’m not sure what he could do.
Daryll Clark and Rashard Casey weren’t as natural a runner as Trace or Tommy Stevens are; both were, to my memory (and the stats of each) bear this out. Because of that, I’m not sure how either would fare in this offense, which relies on the threat of a quarterback run in order to fire at all cylinders - though both were flat-out awesome quarterbacks and Clark in particular will always be one of my favorites.
I think there’s no question that Michael Robinson would have fared exceptionally well in this offense - especially the 2005, post-Northwestern MRob who got more efficient as the weeks went on. And I think a healthy Mills would have run this offense perfectly; he’s been one of the most athletic quarterbacks at Penn State, who unfortunately played under a staff that was unable (or unwilling?) to scheme into those strengths to their fullest ability, surrounded by little talent save Robinson which saw him get beat up play after play, week after week. I don’t often feel sorry for division one football players, but man if I don’t feel bad for Mills; he deserves to be near the top of the PSU record books too.
So exactly which year is THE year? I’ve seen so many years bandied about as “THE” year, I’m curious if we can find the one the vast majority agree on. Is it 2019? 2020? 2021? When the hell will the stars align for us?—RWReese
I mean, does it matter? So many talking heads prognosticating in advance, with no knowledge of how the chemistry of the teams (and injuries!) will bear out. I mean, in 2015 was anyone talking about 2016 as a championship year for Penn State? No, of course not. Because no one really knows how the chips will fall for any program not named Alabama. I think the idea of “THE year” is arbitrary and borderline nonsensical.
Also it’s totally 2019.
I am attending the ACC CG this weekend. From a distance, I am cheering for the Buffalo Bulls in the MAC CG, mainly because PSU could have 3 potential conference champions on their 2019 schedule (Buffalo, Pitt and O$U) These teams winning their games would/could beef up PSU’s SOS ranking. Is it appropriate to cheer for Pitt?—PeteZockyU
I’ve written and re-written this a few times tonight, and it boils down to this: fuck Pitt. If they win, we’re almost assuredly guaranteed no NY6 bowl game.
And even though it would be hilarious and I’m mostly for #teamchaos, above all else I root for what’s best for Penn State. And what’s best for Penn State isn’t a team that they absolutely destroyed taking a spot in a NY6 bowl game; it’s getting into such a game themselves.
Is Pat Fitzgerald more attractive now....That he’s west division champion OR does he benefit that all other west division teams are for the most part mediocre or terrible?
Bonus Q: Score prediction PSU v. NU if played this week?—LarzLion
Ew, Pat Fitzgerald is never attractive. In any kind of way.
After how we played with a healthy Trace McSorley against Maryland last week, coupled with running the numbers of this week’s B1G championship game, I have no doubt that Penn State would win this week by three or four scores.
Who is more insufferable...Urban or Fitzgerald?—Paebr332
We actually had this debate in our housegate after last week’s game, and let me tell you, it’s Fitzgerald and it’s not even close.
Urban is a dick. He knows he’s a dick. He knows you know he’s a dick. He doesn’t pretend to not be a dick, it’s like his whole persona.
Fitzgerald pretends he’s a good guy, that his shit doesn’t stink, and that he’s above the fray. He’s decidedly not.
And of course anyone who could say this and mean it is the definition of insufferable:
Knowing your feelings about Fitz...Who the hell will you be cheering for on Saturday?—Jared Slanina
Ohio State, and it’s not even close.
It’s not just my hatred of Fitz, but it’s above all better for Penn State - because then Northwestern would take the Rose Bowl slot and PSU would definitely not make a NY6 bowl. It’s all about the bowl games, baby.
Recently had an opportunity to try on a pair of foosball receiver gloves. I know, I know, I could just go into any sporting goods store in America and try ‘em on. But I’m an old fart – why would I even think of doing that? This was an offer from a foosball player. So I did. Then they threw me the ball. I was a one-handed catching fool! Threw it over here, over there, up here, down there… snag, snag, snag, snag. One-handed. Completely ruined the mystique! And I grew up in the era of Freddy Biletnikoff & Lester Hayes. So they banned stickum in ’80 or ’81… should they ban receiver gloves?—Smee
I have no problems with players using these gloves, I only have problems with players using these gloves AND STILL NOT CATCHING THE DANG BALL.
Are you as excited as I am to see Zain on Friday night?—Succss With Honor Always
I have plans on Friday night, so not only will I not be able to see #teamTaylor (and Zain) take down (speaking of insufferable) #teamDake, I won’t even be able to listen to the Penn State dual at Bucknell! I’ma need you guys to hold down the fort for me.
But I will be able to watch this over and over again if I so choose (and I do):
As a kid, what was your Mystery Date board game ask?—Smee
In the event this cultural reference is too obscure, I amend it with this (Santa) Clause… As a kid, what was the toy you really wanted and asked Santa for, but didn’t get?—Smee
Looking at this game from 2018 eyes, there is so much wrong with this:
I don’t ever recall playing this game (if you’re gonna play Clue, just freaking play Clue), though I definitely remember hearing about it. But there are other games that I definitely played when I was a kid that are...problematic...as the avowed feminist I am, like Mall Madness, Girl Talk, and Dream Phone. But holy hell if I wouldn’t still play Sweet Valley High’s board game if it wasn’t completely socially unacceptable.
Seating. Why is church the only place where it’s expected you slide over to make room for others effectively giving up your seat? You don’t do that at a movie theater or other places where it’s first come/first served and give the better seats to the latecomers.
Speaking of theater seating, when you have to squeeze by others to get to your seat, which is more offensive – putting your ass toward them or your crotch??—J Breezy
I think it’s rooted in the idea that at church, we’re supposed to attempt to be reverent and dutiful, giving and accepting of others. And giving up your seat to others is the most basic (and easiest, for most) way of, in some regard, sacrificing your own wants and comforts in an effort to make another’s existence at least a little bit better - it’s unselfishness at a basic level.
As for your second question, what the heck kind of movie theatres are you going to? The theatres I go to have wide enough aisles that it’s frankly not a big deal either way, so my goodies aren’t in anyone’s business when I have to sneak out to the restroom.
If money was not an issue, what car would you buy?—kavija66
I currently drive a Ford Edge, and I’ve never loved a car as much as I love my current car. It’s probably somewhat of a cop out to say a new version of the one I have - but that’s the soml.
When I was a teenager, I always wanted a Cabriolet. And I never was sure why that was...but it definitely was.
How many Hallmark Christmas movies will you watch by Christmas Day?
Does cheesiness and being super cliche make them better, or do you wish they would spice them up a bit and go more out of the box? Cast your ideal Hallmark Christmas Movie with PSU players and coaches.—skarocksoi
There are thirty five Hallmark Christmas movies airing before Christmas Day, which means I will be watching 35 Hallmark Christmas movies before Christmas Day (I’ve watched 18 already, which means I’m well on my way - they make great background noise when you’re writing sports posts, just an FYI).
I don’t think the cheesiness and cliches, which are clearly abundant, make them better or worse; they just are. It is decidedly a formula that Hallmark uses because it works for them; they don’t allow their scriptwriters and directors free reign, but rather likely send them a few pages of treatments that detail the story beats that they must hit, and tell them to draft a screenplay around it. Don’t hate it if it works.
And frankly, I don’t care if they want to keep it the way they are or spice it up some - I’ll watch either way, as long as the characters get together in the end. I like my unabashed escapism with a healthy dose of unrealistic, unattainable happy endings, thank you very much!
I’m not going to answer the final point, because I think Dbridi did a good enough job for all of us.