Apps In The Pros Mega Thread

[EastHallApp]

As far as definitions, they are having a similar argument on 247 about the likely outcome out going for it on 4th down. Some are saying likely is something that is 54% or 60% of the time when the reality is many view likely as mostly a sure thing, which 60% is not. Some people view things differently so I think that is why some are going to argue about wording because we have folks who think contributor just means you start, despite the definition not being that, or 60% being likely when that is almost 50/50, which by definition is not likely. Some people seem to have different definitions from what the word actually means.

I'm familiar with the 247 discussion, and I would say you are misinterpreting what people are saying there, as you are most certainly misrepresenting what I or anyone else regarding "folks who think contributor just means you start."

[AppStFan1]

To answer: I think most people can understand what I mean by "bigger contributors." That's not to say our guys who are on rosters aren't contributing at all. Obviously.

I'm talking about regular starters. Guys who aren't at constant risk of being cut or sent to the practice squad. A Pro Bowler would be nice.

And yes, it doesn't help from a notoriety perspective that our best pros are a punter and interior linemen.

ADG has had a nice career. Was hoping his play last year heading into free agency would give him a chance at a regular starting role. Not sure if that's in the cards (pun intended) at Arizona, but I hope he has a great year.

We are never, and have never, had a lot of bigger contributors but I agree with your statement here. I know from notoriety it is not great our best is a punter but we got to take what we can get! haha

[AppStFan1]

As far as definitions, they are having a similar argument on 247 about the likely outcome out going for it on 4th down. Some are saying likely is something that is 54% or 60% of the time when the reality is many view likely as mostly a sure thing, which 60% is not. Some people view things differently so I think that is why some are going to argue about wording because we have folks who think contributor just means you start, despite the definition not being that, or 60% being likely when that is almost 50/50, which by definition is not likely. Some people seem to have different definitions from what the word actually means.

I'm familiar with the 247 discussion, and I would say you are misinterpreting what people are saying there, as you are most certainly misrepresenting what I or anyone else regarding "folks who think contributor just means you start."

You said bigger in a later post so I get what you mean and I agree on that. It was just said contributor above so I was reading that as anyone who is getting on the field. I was basically summing up how they were reading. In what say am I misrepresenting the 247 convo? I want to make sure I am reading it correctly. Got to remember that we are all typing and know exactly what we mean but like with leaving out "bigger" before maybe I am not reading the 247 convo the way it is intended.

[EastHallApp]

As far as definitions, they are having a similar argument on 247 about the likely outcome out going for it on 4th down. Some are saying likely is something that is 54% or 60% of the time when the reality is many view likely as mostly a sure thing, which 60% is not. Some people view things differently so I think that is why some are going to argue about wording because we have folks who think contributor just means you start, despite the definition not being that, or 60% being likely when that is almost 50/50, which by definition is not likely. Some people seem to have different definitions from what the word actually means.

I'm familiar with the 247 discussion, and I would say you are misinterpreting what people are saying there, as you are most certainly misrepresenting what I or anyone else regarding "folks who think contributor just means you start."

You said bigger in a later post so I get what you mean and I agree on that. It was just said contributor above so I was reading that as anyone who is getting on the field. I was basically summing up how they were reading. In what say am I misrepresenting the 247 convo? I want to make sure I am reading it correctly. Got to remember that we are all typing and know exactly what we mean but like with leaving out "bigger" before maybe I am not reading the 247 convo the way it is intended.

Not sure if you are referring to someone else's post. Here is the first thing I wrote about it:

I don't think the total number is so bad, but it would have been nice to produce at least a couple bigger contributors over the course of our run of success. Plenty of programs that have won less than us have done so.

As for the 247 thing, I'll leave those conversations over there.

[AppStFan1]

As far as definitions, they are having a similar argument on 247 about the likely outcome out going for it on 4th down. Some are saying likely is something that is 54% or 60% of the time when the reality is many view likely as mostly a sure thing, which 60% is not. Some people view things differently so I think that is why some are going to argue about wording because we have folks who think contributor just means you start, despite the definition not being that, or 60% being likely when that is almost 50/50, which by definition is not likely. Some people seem to have different definitions from what the word actually means.

I'm familiar with the 247 discussion, and I would say you are misinterpreting what people are saying there, as you are most certainly misrepresenting what I or anyone else regarding "folks who think contributor just means you start."

You said bigger in a later post so I get what you mean and I agree on that. It was just said contributor above so I was reading that as anyone who is getting on the field. I was basically summing up how they were reading. In what say am I misrepresenting the 247 convo? I want to make sure I am reading it correctly. Got to remember that we are all typing and know exactly what we mean but like with leaving out "bigger" before maybe I am not reading the 247 convo the way it is intended.

Not sure if you are referring to someone else's post. Here is the first thing I wrote about it:

I don't think the total number is so bad, but it would have been nice to produce at least a couple bigger contributors over the course of our run of success. Plenty of programs that have won less than us have done so.

As for the 247 thing, I'll leave those conversations over there.

I was not referencing your original post. I completely agree with you on that. We are never going to have a ton of bigger contributors but we should have double digits on NFL rosters.

This group of seniors will be interesting to watch because mainly Thomas Davis, Rashod Dubinion, and Ethan Johnson are being asked about by NFL teams now but Loggains has the coaches bringing up Dalton Stroman, Jayden Ramsey, Jordan Favors, Myles Farmer, and Shawn Collins. We could also have a name or two surprise and start getting looks by the end of the year.