Harsh reality on roster changes

[Ursa Major]

Not trying to debate the flow of information to the public, but on the Pflug decision, has anybody wondered what Stitt will do if Jensen gets a FBS offer?

I don't think the Pflug decision was based on Jensen specifically....Pflug was just not a fit for Stitt...not even as a fallback....

It was more than just the "flow of information." Team not happy with Stitt.

Oh WOW!! There was a poll taken and every member of the team is not happy with Stitt!! We're totally screwed! By the way, could you send us a link to this poll? If the poll doesn't exist, could you stop writing these wild histrionic posts to push your anti-Stitt agenda? At least have the decency to put things in context.

CONTEXT IS EVERYTHING

Let me help you with some examples:

I just talked to my barber and he said the team is not happy with Stitt.

I talked to a current player and he said the team is not happy with Stitt.

I don't really have much going on with my life so I'm going to get some attention on egriz by saying the team is not happy with Stitt. I really don't know this but it fits my agenda!

 

[CV Griz Fan]

You keep acting like something big happened. Sorry, but nothing big has happened. A small, normal run-of-the-mill occurrence, as Grizrule has pointed out. Nothing that a coach should comment on, especially right after it happens. Feel free to give us examples of other programs announcing immediately what has been said in end-of-season and after-spring-ball meetings with players. It would be a minor nightmare for coaches to routinely do announcements like this.

It appears to me that so much of the public feels they have the right to know everything behind every coaching decision. If a coach and/or university should choose to divulge information to the public, fine. If they should choose to limit the information and keep it private, that is fine too.

Granted, I have no way of knowing what Stitt's intention was as to what information to release when. Simply a guess here. I believe the new roster changes and some reasoning behind the roster changes would have been addressed to the public come signing day. The information would have likely been general by summarizing what the new class will bring the program, and why others were not brought back. Is it so wrong for coach Stitt to commit to getting the players in system he feels are the best fit to bring the GRIZ to a championship contending team?

As the season played out, it seems pretty obvious to me and apparently Coach Stitt the GRIZ struggled with more physical teams this season. The games we lost were to teams who controlled the trenches and the ball. Stitt originally went with a mix of big and small WR's. He experimented a lot with various formations and personnel groups in an effort to improve the team. Unfortunately, with in an inconsistent OL, the bigger more physical imposing WR's were more beneficial, and appear to be more beneficial moving forward. His decisions at WR surely seem to make sense to me. As for QB, we experienced a wide variety of QB this season, due to injury. Thankfully, each QB won games for the GRIZ. As the season played out, the offense appeared more imposing and better with a pocket passing and quick decision making QB, than it did with a more athletic scrambling type QB. I am guessing, the decision to part ways with Pflug was more a system comfort than anything else. It will be interesting to see where Pflug moves onto. I have a feeling he will do well.

Also take note as to the kind of players the GRIZ have signed and still are trying to get. These players appear to be more physical kind of players at every position, especially the OL and DL. It really looks to me that Stitt wants to have a mental advantage with physical players before any game begins. Pretty much the same kind of attitude we have seen with NDSU and Hauck led GRIZ teams. The difference is, Stitt wants to also use a more innovative and faster offense to go with the physical attributes.

I like that Stitt is instilling "attitude" in the program. That attitude has been lacking since Bobby Hauck departed. Overall, I feel Stitt is making the right decisions and certainly has the right ultimate goal in mind. He wants what our fan base wants...........NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIPS!!!!

Not trying to debate the flow of information to the public, but on the Pflug decision, has anybody wondered what Stitt will do if Jensen gets a FBS offer?

I don't think the Pflug decision was based on Jensen specifically....Pflug was just not a fit for Stitt...not even as a fallback....

Good point....

 

[UMGriz75]

Not trying to debate the flow of information to the public, but on the Pflug decision, has anybody wondered what Stitt will do if Jensen gets a FBS offer?

I don't think the Pflug decision was based on Jensen specifically....Pflug was just not a fit for Stitt...not even as a fallback....

It was more than just the "flow of information." Team not happy with Stitt.

Oh WOW!! There was a poll taken and every member of the team is not happy with Stitt!! We're totally screwed! By the way, could you send us a link to this poll? If the poll doesn't exist, could you stop writing these wild histrionic posts to push your anti-Stitt agenda? At least have the decency to put things in context.

"Wild histrionic posts," eh. I probably should have mentioned Gregorak too, but didn't want to drag too many names into this. If you "polled" twitter accounts of team members, there was some "not too happy" tweets going around after last Monday -- "Not a fan of how some of my brothers are being treated right now." Do you need the context of that explained?

Nate Harris' tweet that I posted also got considerable retweeting among team members. I was surprised at how many team members retweeted the series of Nate Harris's comments (there was more than one "remark") and the "not a fan" tweet. Then over the weekend, lots of deletions of those tweets.

If you listened to the other part of Stitt's "press conference" he was not overly complementary of "the defense." That was my other takeaway, that Gregorak was likely getting fed-up with Stitt claiming that somehow the Defense wasn't "stepping up," and Stitt never having Gregorak at any of the pressers.

 

[Ursa Major]

I don't think the Pflug decision was based on Jensen specifically....Pflug was just not a fit for Stitt...not even as a fallback....

It was more than just the "flow of information." Team not happy with Stitt.

Oh WOW!! There was a poll taken and every member of the team is not happy with Stitt!! We're totally screwed! By the way, could you send us a link to this poll? If the poll doesn't exist, could you stop writing these wild histrionic posts to push your anti-Stitt agenda? At least have the decency to put things in context.

"Wild histrionic posts," eh. I probably should have mentioned Gregorak too, but didn't want to drag too many names into this. If you "polled" twitter accounts of team members, there was some "not too happy" tweets going around after last Monday -- "Not a fan of how some of my brothers are being treated right now." Do you need the context of that explained?

Nate Harris' tweet that I posted also got considerable retweeting among team members. I was surprised at how many team members retweeted the series of Nate Harris's comments (there was more than one "remark") and the "not a fan" tweet. Then over the weekend, lots of deletions of those tweets.

If you listened to the other part of Stitt's "press conference" he was not overly complementary of "the defense." That was my other takeaway, that Gregorak was likely getting fed-up with Stitt claiming that somehow the Defense wasn't "stepping up," and Stitt never having Gregorak at any of the pressers.

So a handful of tweets equates to the "Team not happy with Stitt." Like it or not, this is your pattern 75. Take a small truth and then stretch it way out of proportion to make it fit your agenda. Then repeat it ad nauseam. This is why people get upset with you on here. You take a thinly veiled agenda and just keep pounding away at it. If your goal is to change minds or build consensus, your strategy is working against you. People respond negatively when the same unpopular agenda-driven message is posted over and over. It's too bad because you often are/were a good poster when you aren't overly emotional about a topic.

This will be my last post in response to you on this thread. It's a fool's errand arguing with sons of bitches that will never admit that they are wrong or that they can make a mistake. Pure hubris and ego.

I will leave you with one thing, listen to the feedback you're getting from a multitude of posters. Many are offering you the same advice. It's not what you're saying that is so intolerable, it's how and how often you're saying it.

 

[MsMaroon]

It was more than just the "flow of information." Team not happy with Stitt.

Oh WOW!! There was a poll taken and every member of the team is not happy with Stitt!! We're totally screwed! By the way, could you send us a link to this poll? If the poll doesn't exist, could you stop writing these wild histrionic posts to push your anti-Stitt agenda? At least have the decency to put things in context.

"Wild histrionic posts," eh. I probably should have mentioned Gregorak too, but didn't want to drag too many names into this. If you "polled" twitter accounts of team members, there was some "not too happy" tweets going around after last Monday -- "Not a fan of how some of my brothers are being treated right now." Do you need the context of that explained?

Nate Harris' tweet that I posted also got considerable retweeting among team members. I was surprised at how many team members retweeted the series of Nate Harris's comments (there was more than one "remark") and the "not a fan" tweet. Then over the weekend, lots of deletions of those tweets.

If you listened to the other part of Stitt's "press conference" he was not overly complementary of "the defense." That was my other takeaway, that Gregorak was likely getting fed-up with Stitt claiming that somehow the Defense wasn't "stepping up," and Stitt never having Gregorak at any of the pressers.

So a handful of tweets equates to the "Team not happy with Stitt." Like it or not, this is your pattern 75. Take a small truth and then stretch it way out of proportion to make it fit your agenda. Then repeat it ad nauseam. This is why people get upset with you on here. You take a thinly veiled agenda and just keep pounding away at it. If your goal is to change minds or build consensus, your strategy is working against you. People respond negatively when the same unpopular agenda-driven message is posted over and over. It's too bad because you often are/were a good poster when you aren't overly emotional about a topic.

This will be my last post in response to you on this thread. It's a fool's errand arguing with sons of bitches that will never admit that they are wrong or that they can make a mistake. Pure hubris and ego.

I will leave you with one thing, listen to the feedback you're getting from a multitude of posters. Many are offering you the same advice. It's not what you're saying that is so intolerable, it's how and how often you're saying it.

:clap: :clap: :clap:

 

[UMGriz75]

So a handful of tweets equates to the "Team not happy with Stitt." Like it or not, this is your pattern 75. Take a small truth and then stretch it way out of proportion to make it fit your agenda. Then repeat it ad nauseam. This is why people get upset with you on here. You take a thinly veiled agenda and just keep pounding away at it.

Actually, this is your pattern. I didn't like Stitt's temper tantrum. Didn't mean I don't like him as a coach; but you need to make that assumption about ANY criticsm, which you just don't seem to be able to bear on behalf of your boy. I attended my first Griz game in 1957, and have been a fan since, but I didn't agree to trade in my brain. When a coach screws up, he screws up. That happened to be something I deal or have dealt with at a national level for a long time, and he screwed up.

Now, you want to characterize my evidence as a "handful" of tweets; you don't actually know, you are purposely trying to minimize what I see and hear on a daily basis, because I happen to be on campus every day and get some of these kids in my classes from time to time, and there is even some socializing. I point out "tweets" to you because there is the tangible proof that you tried to claim didn't exist. Oops for you. Now it's a "handful."

Let me assure you. It did not go over well with "the team."

It is possible to simply disagree without always blowing up over "anti-Stitt agendas," because in the first place, so what? In the second place, watching a temper tantrum at a press conference, doesn't make anyone "anti-Stitt," it simply points to the fact that the guy could use some "class" lessons. Only the future will tell how recruiting goes in the metropolitan Portland area in the future. The fact is, there was a great deal of team unhappiness over this. Busts your agenda, doesn't it? Kids are let go all the time. Why did this one blow up? Because there is more to this than merely a botched "roster adjustment."

 

[MsMaroon]

:roll: I'll keep trying.

But sometimes I feel my powers slipping like the Wicked Witch of the West . . . "I'm melting, I'm melting!"


AoD

 

[bgbigdog]

Mods - do the right thing here, for the love of... Let's make this a two-fer, what do you say?

 

[EverettGriz]

It was more than just the "flow of information." Team not happy with Stitt.

Oh WOW!! There was a poll taken and every member of the team is not happy with Stitt!! We're totally screwed! By the way, could you send us a link to this poll? If the poll doesn't exist, could you stop writing these wild histrionic posts to push your anti-Stitt agenda? At least have the decency to put things in context.

"Wild histrionic posts," eh. I probably should have mentioned Gregorak too, but didn't want to drag too many names into this. If you "polled" twitter accounts of team members, there was some "not too happy" tweets going around after last Monday -- "Not a fan of how some of my brothers are being treated right now." Do you need the context of that explained?

Nate Harris' tweet that I posted also got considerable retweeting among team members. I was surprised at how many team members retweeted the series of Nate Harris's comments (there was more than one "remark") and the "not a fan" tweet. Then over the weekend, lots of deletions of those tweets.

If you listened to the other part of Stitt's "press conference" he was not overly complementary of "the defense." That was my other takeaway, that Gregorak was likely getting fed-up with Stitt claiming that somehow the Defense wasn't "stepping up," and Stitt never having Gregorak at any of the pressers.

So a handful of tweets equates to the "Team not happy with Stitt." Like it or not, this is your pattern 75. Take a small truth and then stretch it way out of proportion to make it fit your agenda. Then repeat it ad nauseam. This is why people get upset with you on here. You take a thinly veiled agenda and just keep pounding away at it. If your goal is to change minds or build consensus, your strategy is working against you. People respond negatively when the same unpopular agenda-driven message is posted over and over. It's too bad because you often are/were a good poster when you aren't overly emotional about a topic.

This will be my last post in response to you on this thread. It's a fool's errand arguing with sons of bitches that will never admit that they are wrong or that they can make a mistake. Pure hubris and ego.

I will leave you with one thing, listen to the feedback you're getting from a multitude of posters. Many are offering you the same advice. It's not what you're saying that is so intolerable, it's how and how often you're saying it.

Dead on balls accurate. Great post.

 

[grizindabox]

 

[MsMaroon]

Oh WOW!! There was a poll taken and every member of the team is not happy with Stitt!! We're totally screwed! By the way, could you send us a link to this poll? If the poll doesn't exist, could you stop writing these wild histrionic posts to push your anti-Stitt agenda? At least have the decency to put things in context.

"Wild histrionic posts," eh. I probably should have mentioned Gregorak too, but didn't want to drag too many names into this. If you "polled" twitter accounts of team members, there was some "not too happy" tweets going around after last Monday -- "Not a fan of how some of my brothers are being treated right now." Do you need the context of that explained?

Nate Harris' tweet that I posted also got considerable retweeting among team members. I was surprised at how many team members retweeted the series of Nate Harris's comments (there was more than one "remark") and the "not a fan" tweet. Then over the weekend, lots of deletions of those tweets.

If you listened to the other part of Stitt's "press conference" he was not overly complementary of "the defense." That was my other takeaway, that Gregorak was likely getting fed-up with Stitt claiming that somehow the Defense wasn't "stepping up," and Stitt never having Gregorak at any of the pressers.

So a handful of tweets equates to the "Team not happy with Stitt." Like it or not, this is your pattern 75. Take a small truth and then stretch it way out of proportion to make it fit your agenda. Then repeat it ad nauseam. This is why people get upset with you on here. You take a thinly veiled agenda and just keep pounding away at it. If your goal is to change minds or build consensus, your strategy is working against you. People respond negatively when the same unpopular agenda-driven message is posted over and over. It's too bad because you often are/were a good poster when you aren't overly emotional about a topic.

This will be my last post in response to you on this thread. It's a fool's errand arguing with sons of bitches that will never admit that they are wrong or that they can make a mistake. Pure hubris and ego.

I will leave you with one thing, listen to the feedback you're getting from a multitude of posters. Many are offering you the same advice. It's not what you're saying that is so intolerable, it's how and how often you're saying it.

Dead on balls accurate. Great post.

Yup.

 

[UMGriz75]

So a handful of tweets equates to the "Team not happy with Stitt." Like it or not, this is your pattern 75. Take a small truth and then stretch it way out of proportion to make it fit your agenda. Then repeat it ad nauseam. ...
I will leave you with one thing, listen to the feedback you're getting from a multitude of posters. Many are offering you the same advice. It's not what you're saying that is so intolerable, it's how and how often you're saying it.

See what you did there? I mentioned "the team" exactly once, in a single sentence, based on the tangible evidence as it accumulated over the week.

And you went nuts. With multiple repostings, impassioned and dishonest denunciations, and blowing the whole conversation up, once again.

That's all it takes, isn't it? A single sentence, of an actual truth.

 

[MsMaroon]

So a handful of tweets equates to the "Team not happy with Stitt." Like it or not, this is your pattern 75. Take a small truth and then stretch it way out of proportion to make it fit your agenda. Then repeat it ad nauseam. ...
I will leave you with one thing, listen to the feedback you're getting from a multitude of posters. Many are offering you the same advice. It's not what you're saying that is so intolerable, it's how and how often you're saying it.

See what you did there? I mentioned "the team" exactly once, in a single sentence, based on the tangible evidence as it accumulated over the week.

And you went nuts. With multiple repostings, impassioned and dishonest denunciations, and blowing the whole conversation up, once again.

That's all it takes, isn't it? A single sentence, of an actual truth.

Ok, now I'm really confused. :?