TOBY GERHART FOR HEISMAN VOTE EVERY DAY!

FootballDad

Hall of Famer
Joined
Oct 19, 2009
Messages
5,548
Location
Somewhere near Kansas City, MO
DixieDestroyer said:
...I knew it, the pantywafer, limp-wrist removed my post. There was no offensive language, name calling or racial epitaphs, etc. I assume they've marked CF as "racist" or "extreme". Another outlet controlled by the cultural Marxists!
smiley7.gif
Nevertheless, the post seems to have some legs. There are some excellent posters making extremely valid points, in addition to the usual idiots.
 

FootballDad

Hall of Famer
Joined
Oct 19, 2009
Messages
5,548
Location
Somewhere near Kansas City, MO
FootballDad said:
FootballDad said:
I was just reading the article when I saw your last post, wile, here is the link on behalf of KP
I just skipped back over to this link, and the attached poll is showing that 53% think that Toby was robbed of the Heisman because of race, versus only 26% that say no. The rest say that "the race card is old". There is no (polite) way to accurately describe idiot DFW's like that.
The poll is now at 60% who think that Toby got hosed because he is white. Only 20% say no.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Will see if my post lasts (Simmons) basically stated that the caste system is headed for the ash heap and pointed out that white men are not considered for football but that their sisters are a caste of sex objects and playtoys for Tiger types.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Of course the caste system has devolved to a complete joke. The only game I got to watch of Toby was the USC game, what I noticed besides Toby crushing the caste system under his cleats was the makeup of the USC cheerleading squad. Hugh Hefner could not have created a whiter look than that, and all that from the "diverse" USC student body. So there are two caste systems related to football.
 

FootballDad

Hall of Famer
Joined
Oct 19, 2009
Messages
5,548
Location
Somewhere near Kansas City, MO
wile said:
Of course the caste system has devolved to a complete joke. The only game I got to watch of Toby was the USC game, what I noticed besides Toby crushing the caste system under his cleats was the makeup of the USC cheerleading squad. Hugh Hefner could not have created a whiter look than that, and all that from the "diverse" USC student body. So there are two caste systems related to football.
At USC, and most caste teams, the supporting casts are all white, hence "DWFs". Also, USC, in spite of being in the middle of the 'hood in LA, is a majority white school. There are FAR more latinos and asians than blacks at USC as well.
 

Jimmy Chitwood

Hall of Famer
Joined
Aug 10, 2005
Messages
8,975
Location
Arkansas
as i showed in a post in the Media Racism & Stereotyping forum, at Boise State of the roughly 19,000 students enrolledonly 361 are black ... and 20% of those are athletes. so only 289 "real" students at Boise State are black. yet somehow the DWFs (both student and admininstration)still think diversity is good, and they jump through mental hoops in order to twist themselves and their policies to favor this insignificant group.


it truly does boggle the mind.
 
G

Guest

Guest
One poster there seems to be making decent arguments using McFadden, but one thing I'll bet McFadden was never asked to play fullback. That is the crux of the caste system in a nutshell. I'm also beginning to agree that the SEC gets way too much credit. Sure they put up a great top tier, but below that they are probably not much better than the over rated Big Ten.
 

Taco

Guru
Joined
Aug 25, 2008
Messages
183
Kaptain Poop said:
Taco said:
The race card only "got old" when whitey started using it.

Personally, i don't think Toby Gerhat's race had an impact with him not winning the heisman.

Having said that, i do believe that Toby's race had much to do with the position he was in. What do i mean by that? Well simply put, his race was a contributing factor in why a holder for numerous California football records was not picked up as RB for a powerhouse football team (ex: Pete Carroll at USC who wanted him to play FB/Linebacker) but instead only allowed to play RB at a smaller school, this case Stanford. Had Gerhart been treated fairly, he would have been picked up by a high profile team, gotten the exposure he deserves, and wouldn't have started to get mentioned in the Heisman race only a month or 2 before the selection.

Mark Ingram's only edge over Gerhart was playing for Alabama and being in the SEC, which frankly as a conference, wasn't even that good. SEC = hype, and lots of it.

Ron Dayne didn't exactly play for a high profile team and yet he won the Heisman easily with similar stats to Gerhart's. Wisconsin is the Stanford of the Big Ten. I have to disagree with your assertion that race did not play a role in Gerhart not getting the Heisman.

The next runningback from a lesser team in a major conference that puts up the numbers Gerhart did will win the Heisman in a landslide. I'd bet my life on it. This has everything to do with race.

Dayne played for Wisconsin? For some reason i thought he played for Texas. Maybe i got him mixed up with someone else. Anyways, I suppose that fact throws a wrench into my argument.
 
G

Guest

Guest
My latest comments asks if any of those "natural" tailbacks were asked or told to play fullback.
 

FootballDad

Hall of Famer
Joined
Oct 19, 2009
Messages
5,548
Location
Somewhere near Kansas City, MO
wile said:
My latest comments asks if any of those "natural" tailbacks were asked or told to play fullback.
It's an interesting post, like I said. There are a couple of log-headed doofuses commenting, like Brad the SEC homer. I notice that nobody addresses the questions regarding blatant recruiting biases.
 
G

Guest

Guest
As I've said the dwfs are trained, debating them so they all of a sudden slap their forheads and go "gosh you are right" is nearly futitle, but its to plant the seed within their thick cranium that will one day sprout and crack their "deeply held views."
 

Kaptain

Master
Joined
Nov 25, 2004
Messages
3,384
Location
Minnesota
Does Gerhart have another year of eligibility? He has played for years but he may have been granted an extra year because of his injury his sophomore season. If so, I would actually like him to play one more year at Stanford. We know the NFL will minimize him.
 

dwid

Hall of Famer
Joined
Feb 17, 2008
Messages
4,254
Location
Louisiana
He can get another year of eligibility due to medical reasons, but he just finished 21 credit hours to get school over with so he can focus on the combine. I think he should try the NFL, he would be risking getting injured if he came back. It would be very hard to top what he did this season. He has the hype and plenty of people have seen his talent and think he is capable of doing it at the next level. Although he probably could rush for 2000 if he came back with Luck having a year of experience and being that the Oline is still young, I want him to take his chances with the NFL. It is going to be hard for teams to not give him a real shot to carry the ball, plus Stanford has some White rb's in waiting like Tyler Gaffney and Brandon Bourbon.Edited by: dwid
 

backrow

Hall of Famer
Joined
Oct 23, 2005
Messages
7,401
Location
Spain
i wholeheartedly agree dwid. even if he could top his season, in the eyes of NFL it's not going to change a thing: he either will get a shot or he won't.
 

Kaptain

Master
Joined
Nov 25, 2004
Messages
3,384
Location
Minnesota
Well for us as spectators at least at Stanford we know he will run the ball. We all have had similar great hopes for guys in the past that we were sure the NFL would have to give a chance - and then they didn't. I just want to see him play.
 
Top