Just gonna say this once then you can do as you will.
You said to show holes in your statement if you feel there is some.
I showed the holes that the opinions you had were impossible to be true unless you knew inside information coupled with how a teenager in question mind worked. Which you had neither.
Just because you label something as a hole does not mean I have to agree that it is, isn't that true? I laid out a logical thought process, did not require you to accept it as fact. Nothing you offered changed my thinking, what may seem to be holes to you are not required to be considered holes to everyone. Isn't that true? We all do have the tight to our own perception and opinion, do we not.
You stated Calipari brought in Vanderbilt to try and push PJ to sign and that Vanderbilt has wanted Kentucky the whole time which are not substantiated by any evidence.
No, I did not say that, READ my address of that very question twice today, not going to repeat it a 3rd time nor should I need to. When I say something, if you are not sure what I mean, by all means ask but don't skew my words toward what you want me to have said and then try to hit me for saying things I did not say.
It also implies that Calipari is using recruits to leverage against other recruits with no intention to actually sign them, just to use as a pawn. You describe this behavior then state we are probably doing the same to Vanderbilt in stringing him along because we want Washigton more.
Again, you accusation that I said anything near Roy was playing Vanderbilt is just not true, I NEVER said that. matter of fact I said that I did not know if Roy had even spoken to Vanderbilt since his Late Night visit. What I actually said was that we had Vanderbilts head turned by the fact that he was at our Late Night and not Kys. YOU go back and read it and tell me that is not exactly what I said. I said Roy could very well make sure PJ knew that Vanderbilt was looking hard at us, I would hope would make sure vanderbilt knew that. But I never said Vanderbilt informed Roy he was ready to commit and Roy told him to hold off, never said that, show me where I did or admit you got that wrong.
Also, implying Vanderbilt only was brought in for a visit was just to push PJ Washington to sign is to insinuats Calipari could not be recruiting both. It is entirely possible that bringing Vanderbilt in for a visit and possinly to sign makes it less likely PJ washington signs due to recruting someone in the same spot.
It is my opinion that kalipari wants PJ more than Vanderbilt and whether Kal brought vanderbilt in to push PJ to a decision or to shore up his plan B, I do not know and you don't either. I do think Vanderbilt visiting Ky after their Late night may not be well received by PJ as it applies to committing to Ky, what is co crazy about that?
You stated how it was basically an astronomical reach that Calipari could actually want both recruits and was actually recruiting both with the intent to sign both. (You were dismissive about it being a reach)
WoW, where did you ever come up with that didy? Of freakin course kal would LOVE to get them both, Roy would to, what coach wouldn't? I talked about the unlikelyhood of Kal or any coach getting them both. You do realize there is a difference between what you want and what you can get, you do realize the difference in those 2 things don't ya?
The other poster told you how you were wrong to be dismissive to that idea because Calipari has "almost every year" recruited the same positions for multiple players.
LOL, once again, now it is "almost every year" and now rather than discuss "from the same recruiting class" as I was speaking to you want to change the question to include who they have returning. That is on you and YOUR IMAGINATION, not my trip but yours...
You then produced an inaccurate list to show who Calipari signed each year. Cleverly omitting players, changing positions they were recruited for, or my favorite trying to separate forward and wing to try and make it look different.
You seem to need to add a conspiricy theory where one did not exist? Guy says Kal brings in multiple 5 stars from the same class that play the same position every year. So rather than try to go off memory, I google and ESPN pops up, I used their information, your problem should not be with me, seems like your problem is with ESPN. But no matter what service you want to use, it still does not in any way say Kal actually gets multiple 5 stars players from each class that play the same position every year. Ya see, that is the part you want to consistently leave out and only reason I can see that you do is that it does not help this rant craving you have for and about me and my opinions.
Another list was produced Calipari signed multiple recruits at a position in quite a few years, and instead of just realizing you were wrong and adjusting your opjnion, arguments were made about when someone signed, if they were really 5 stars, and etc.
Why repeat yourself, you just tried to use this very argument in the last bullet point? LOL, see my reply to that bullet point, I don't need to repeat this yet another time today.
Which is ironic because the whole statement was... Calipari RECRUITS multiple players at the same position almost every year. Which he does. He doesn't always land multiple recruits at the same position but he recruits them and has shown he will take multiples if he can.
OMG, WoW, now you turn it to Kalipari recruits myultiple players for the same position almost every year? Yeah, well kal and EVERY other D-1 coach does as well, so why point that out? Recruriting multiple players for a single position and getting multiple players from the same class that play the same position that are both 5 star players does not happen anywhere close to OFTEN. Well of freakin course kal and any other D-1 coach would take 2 5 star players that play the same position if they could get them the problem is not the wanting to get them, the problem is actually getting them.
The whole issue is that you want a certain outcome. So, you are trying to think up a scenario which would lead to the outcome you want. In doing so, however, you took major leaps, tried to express the ability to know the mind of a teenager you never met, and failed to consider evidence which is contrary to your scenario.
I have laid out a logical consideration of what I think may happen, keep in mind I have consistently laid out what I have as my opinion. Now as of today I see ButterButts take on other people's opinions, that they are all BS unless they agree with his own, his words and not mine, read them yourself. It seem as if you are treating my opinions as BB does, because you may not agree with them that they must be BS.
But let me ask YOU, I do not believe Ky will get BOTH PJ and Vanderbilt, that is my opinion, do you consider that opinion to be BS? In the reasons I have clearly laid out for my opinion do you have a single shred of absolute proof that I am wrong? Not asking if you agree, asking if you have a single bit of proof I am wrong? Because to flatly say I am wrong then, how did you put it at the top of this reply, let me quote your words " unless you knew inside information coupled with how a teenager in question mind worked. Which you had neither." Do you know PJ, do you know how his mind works? You sure seem willing to holier than thou to lecture me on how his mind works? OMG, you are guilty of what you accuse me of, AGAIN...LOL
You literally could have just said.... I really want x to happen instead of x will happen due to y and z (when y and z are completely based in zero evidence).
No, what I said that was better than that is that it was my opinion. Do you deny that, I did at every turn make sure folks knew this was my opinion, isn't that true.
Instead you have chose to argue for however many posts because you ignored evidence or created a scenario not based in any evidence. And, when people tried to show you had faulty reason you took it as offense and argued instead.
Yes, I take offense when I am accused to saying things I have not said, who doesn't? Is it OK for folks to make up things you said that you didn't and then ASSAIL YOU FOR THEIR MADE UP NONSENSE? Who are YOU to judge my opinions as faulty, I believe I am the judge and jury of my own opinions, you do not get that right. You can disagree with my opinions but you do not get to be my judge and jury nor executioner. I consider your trying to be the judge of what is right and wrong of my opinions to be very disrespectful. If you want to bring new facts to the table I will consider them and maybe even adjust my opinions if those facts are worthy IMO but I and only I get to determine that for my own opinions. You can disagree all you want with my opinions, you are not required to agree nor am I required to agree with opinions you hold that I do not agree with.
I am done. Carry on.
