Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

So, im just sittin'


Your Creeper Cabbie

Recommended Posts

42 minutes ago, cookinwithgas said:

"sound" is a construct that requires a listener. Without an ear and brain to process the pressure waves generated, there is no sound.

the pressure waves are generated whether there's someone there to witness it, or not. you don't have to witness or measure an event for it to happen. there's a vast universe of events constantly happening that we aren't witnessing, yet they are still happening.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, cookinwithgas said:

thats not sound though. It's pressure waves. "Sound" is the result of your eardrum vibrating due to the pressure waves which is then interpreted by the brain.

that depends on if you're a physicist or a physiologist. a physicist will say that the event of making the pressure wave is creating sound.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Mother Grabber said:

the pressure waves are generated whether there's someone there to witness it, or not. you don't have to witness or measure an event for it to happen. there's a vast universe of events constantly happening that we aren't witnessing, yet they are still happening.

Made me think of this

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, cookinwithgas said:

Sound = force creating waves, medium carrying waves, receiver to process waves and convert to electrical impulses the brain recognizes as sound

If the wave is at 40kHz, a dog can hear it but a human cannot. Its sound for the dog but not for the human.

it's a matter of how you define sound.  A physiologist defines sound as the interpretation of the pressure wave. A physicist defines it as the creation of the wave.  My first degree is in physics, so I side with that definition.  My dad was a professor of linguistics, so he'd probably side with you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Actually I have always felt that using a qb to sneak was a huge mistake even for big guys. Do you remember when Cam sneaked the ball and got a helmet spear to the head and it wasn't even called. It is unnecessary and potentially dangerous. Everyone knows what you are going to do. Why not have a big guy or backup run the ball who is disposable? Yeah they know what is coming if you bring in a big guy. Like they don't if you keep the QB in...... Actually there are many more reasons not to sneak the ball with the qb versus using something else like New Orleans did who could still run or pass.
    • you want me to provide evidence of his jump balls? Or bailing the pocket?  I don't think either of those claims requires me to show you evidence.  What do you want evidence of exactly?  never did I mention downfield throws.  I said, he gets blind to play at the lines because of his size (the quick stuff).  There are literally plays I don't have time to search for but have been highlighted on QB school where there is just no way he can see the options on certain plays even if wide open (talking behind and around the line of scrimmage).   Line too close paired with the receiving  option too close.  And the stat I referenced (which you can find on next gen stats) was he is below average at and behind the line of scrimmage....which I'm sure his size/vision plays a role in the why. I have an agenda? Cool.  Then so do you.  and again, Bryce's cherry picked best play (which isn't how anything works).....still leaves him on the low end of production.  I'm not overly bashing Bryce.  I just acknowledge, most signs point to him having a low ceiling.  And in the big picture, that's not the direction you want to go.  He is our QB for now.  I hope he improves.  Which in turn would allow our O and others to develop.   But to me, there isn't much of an argument that Bryce Young is anything but short term solution.   
    • Again where is the evidence. You keep saying it but honestly you have shown no evidence. Unless you know what he was supposed to do and then what he did do, you don't know anything about his intentions and or forced changes due to height. His completion percentage for passes from 1 to 10 yards was only slightly lower than his best percentage which was 10 to 20 yards passing.  Not enough of a difference to be significantly different.  Truth is you have an agenda that you try to justify despite any evidence to the contrary. Many of us felt the same way but have allowed his actual play to inform our opinion. I still would have picked Stroud over Bryce but I am willing to keep an open mind and see what is there instead of filtering everything through my biases and already polarized opinions.
×
×
  • Create New...