Quarrels?

[Wasnt-drunk-didnt-troll]

Lot of name calling, as done in the previous thread, but this time directed at me. The proof is obituaries are public record and no one matched the description in the entire state for your "brother." Again, this all started with me saying you shouldnt be calling someone a "dbag." It is always said the things people project out is generally a reflection of withen. I would agree you would have to be a "flake" or "psychopath" or someone would need to "swell an ego" pretty bad to post something so shameful.
In case your need your proof. http://www.obituaries.com/ns/obituariescom/obits.aspx?state=ca

 

[Hawkeyeinsoutherncalifornia]

You just don’t get this do you.. there’s no obit because it’s PRIVATE.. and you don’t even know anything about what happened I can also pull up a obit from anywhere as well.. did you know my mother passed away back in June? Was her name in the obit? Absolutely not.. but thanks for your concern and thanks for trying to push more pain on the situation as is but you’re grabbing at air and I don’t really care what you think inspector gadget.. again, my main point on this is you’re a troll chasing after me on a post that’s been deleted .. because of your nonsense and boredom .. I really hope no one you love dies tragically.. I for one wouldn’t be in a message board wasting my time to prove whatever you’re trying to prove.. you can think
I am a liar all you want.. but please I hope this doesn’t effect your personal life anymore as it obviously has as you just need to keep on following me around and make sure you’re heard. Now do you feel better inside? Is this going to boost your obvious low self esteem and boring life to go on a message board to call someone out on something they have absolutely no idea about? I am done with your bullshit so ignore button is on .. get another hobby or something.. and yeah.. name calling? I think that’s why drew me to this response back to you ..

Lot of name calling, as done in the previous thread bit this time directed at me. The proof is obituaries are public record and no one match the description in the entire state for your "brother." Again, this all started with me saying you shouldnt be calling someone a "dbag. It is always said the things people project out is generally a reflection of withen. I would agree you would have to be a "flake" or "psychopath" or someone would need to "swell an ego" pretty bad to post something so shameful.
In case your need your proof. http://www.obituaries.com/ns/obituariescom/obits.aspx?state=ca

 

[Wasnt-drunk-didnt-troll]

Tl;dr. You wanted proof i got it. Your story has more holes in it than a cheese cloth.

 

[DodgerHawki]

That's funny, I based almost the entirety of my prior post about "assertiveness" based on Brian's interview too.

Ask yourself this ... given that the young guys "are coming in every day and pushing it forward" .... is Quarrels not capable of "pushing it forward?" Look at Easley ... he's a guy who jumped ahead of everyone else (maybe even VandeBerg ... due to health) ... and the thing that distinguished him was his work-ethic ... how he approached things ... what he'd do to earn a role on the team. In other words ... he too was "pushing it forward." If you parse Brian's words ... what he's essentially stating is that Quarrels hasn't done anything wrong (so there isn't a negative reason why he's not playing) .... but nor has he been impressing enough to earn playing time either. He's likely doing what he's supposed to do ... he's likely working hard and he's trying to learn the O and all that stuff. However, if he really wants to be "pushing it forward" ... he needs to assert himself ... he needs to do MORE! That's part of what assertiveness is all about ... it's not just meeting the basics of expectations ... it's trying to do more ... to work harder ... to try to go above and beyond so that you can learn more and learn faster. When you do that ... you improve more and your play stands out more to the coaches (because he can play faster and you're more apt to make plays).

When you read some of the recent interviews about the young WRs ... the impression is that those guys are really approaching things with surprising maturity given their youth. They realize that they need to keep on pushing if they are going to improve enough to see the field ... in order to do that, their play needs to stand out at practice. For their play to stand out in practice ... they need to both work hard and be willing to be detail oriented.

We'll agree to disagree. It's a competitive environment. By the very nature of team sports, some guys are going to end up being better players than others. It doesn't mean that the player who isn't playing is doing anything wrong. It might, it might not, we don't really know, only the coaches know. But all the posts about Quarrels make it sounds like if he just tried harder or wanted it more, he would play. Which in my experience can be a load of crap when talking about sports (sometimes). There are times when one guy is better than another. That's it, it doesn't mean the other guy doesn't work as hard, just that he's not as good. Does it mean Miles Taylor "needs to work harder" because now Snyder and Hooker are starting? By all accounts Taylor is a good teammate and works hard. But with Hooker now being on the roster and Snyder returning from injury, he's now the third-best safety.

I don't disagree about anything about the freshmen receivers. They appear to be doing a good job. Copeland is doing a good job of creating a competitive room which will only mean good things down the road. I would just caution us about making judgements about players' character when we know nothing about what happens or doesn't happen in practice or meetings.

 

[ghostOfHomer777]

We'll agree to disagree. It's a competitive environment. By the very nature of team sports, some guys are going to end up being better players than others. It doesn't mean that the player who isn't playing is doing anything wrong. It might, it might not, we don't really know, only the coaches know. But all the posts about Quarrels make it sounds like if he just tried harder or wanted it more, he would play. Which in my experience can be a load of crap when talking about sports (sometimes). There are times when one guy is better than another. That's it, it doesn't mean the other guy doesn't work as hard, just that he's not as good. Does it mean Miles Taylor "needs to work harder" because now Snyder and Hooker are starting? By all accounts Taylor is a good teammate and works hard. But with Hooker now being on the roster and Snyder returning from injury, he's now the third-best safety.

I don't disagree about anything about the freshmen receivers. They appear to be doing a good job. Copeland is doing a good job of creating a competitive room which will only mean good things down the road. I would just caution us about making judgements about players' character when we know nothing about what happens or doesn't happen in practice or meetings.

That's a very fair point! It's true that sometimes another player simply has "it" ... and those intangibles are the extra ingredient that leads to the level of play that we see on the field. For example, by all accounts, in the off-season ... Phil Parker sounded really high on Clayberg. However, Stone is another one of those guys who just has "it" ... he's a guy who has that extra bit of instinct and intangibles that is just about impossible to teach.

Where I'm simply struck is that Cooper, ISM, and B. Smith all have more of "it" than Quarrels?

Also, since I'm an educator, I can attest that often it's not just how hard a person works. It's also how efficiently a person works too. Furthermore, a person can often be their own worst enemy ... their own psychology can get in the way. Fear of failure can be paralyzing to many people ... be it in academics OR athletics.