PHONE'S RINGING -- IT'S URBAN ON THE LINE
This guy knows a thing or two about talent.
I hope that isn't considered contact from an agent.
Haha, he would be the one to do it before he even starts school. He needs to get Chad, TO in order..soon
New player #'s up: www.dottingthei.com
He didn't contact TP did he? I thought it was just an interview on his thoughts on Pryor.
No contact, but you can tell he's salivating.
We're all salivating. He's Buckeye Porn, don't you remember?
Why'd Stonebrenner take 11 and not Pryor? I mean he committed first but you'd think the big man gets priority. Maybe it's an early sign of team pecking order and mutual respect? Maybe he just took it before Pryor got there?
The Thad 2.5:
He said he wanted to create a new identity and Stoney was there first. Im sure if he wanted it, he would have gotten it. http://dottingthei.com/index.p...
am I the only one scrounging up pennies to try to afford a no. 74 jersey?
Who the hell is Stonebrenner?
Stoneburner. Stone-burner. Stone Burner.
Outside of his family, your probably one of the few.
Turner to scUM.
Little sweet Baby Jesus please keep the sports antichrist Drew Rosenhaus away from Pryor and the OSU athletic department.
He wanted a clear break from high school.
Hence numero dos.
I am not sure seeing Drew Rosenhaus salivating over Pryor is a good thing for OSU football-- does anyone remember Chris Carter?? This guy has to stay squeaky clean because the entire media world is just waiting to say "see I knew Tressel runs a dirty program"..... something about Pryor just makes me a little nervous---- Tressel needs to put a spy on this guy
I don't share your same nervousness. However, I'm all for a spy. Butch Reynolds has vacated his position...
Sign me up for the Speed Coach/TP Spy.
TP = did not run for 4000 and pass for 4000 in a season. that would be the career totals. would be a damn impressive season.
blah #1 recruit blahhhhhhhhh
I think TP needs a season just running plays that make the fan base happy.
Matt Barkley (going to USC, 2009) passed for about 3,500 yds just last year. Even tho Pryor passed for 4,000 (still solid), Barkley is ridiculous.
Outside of his family, your probably one of the few."
Firstly, I have your back, Mr. Vico. Mr. Adams was as baller as they come during the Army All-American game. The young man is scary good (read: dominant) and looks to be a (as many years as he chooses to stay equal to or beyond the NCAA minimum) starter. As touted as Boone and Barton were, I have the suspicion that Adams might spend his time at OSU learning how to be the best goddamn college lineman every jerk-off NFL analyst has ever seen. At least better (and more deserved of praise) than that fuck-stick Long. Before anybody dismisses this as hype, do your research. Watch the AA game. This kid is amazing.
And look how well Clausen has done after collaring California HS football.
Thanks, ElevenWarriors, for giving this insignificant douchebag some more publicity.
Seriously, why does anyone care what this guy thinks? This is the guy who tells his clients to cause off-field trouble when contract negotiations are near. See Terrell Owens, and Chad Johnson.
He is bad for sports.
Guys, Hazel is really RockKing from WaitingForNextYear.com. I'm not sure why he takes such pleasure in posting under pseudonyms here to rip us, but evidently it takes a douche to know a douche.
See also: http://www.elevenwarriors.com/...
Actually, no, you're wrong.
I am a person who works in the same office as RockKing.
Nice try though.
Unreal. Nothing like a fellow blogger, whose blog we have on our blogroll because I like this site, calls me a douche because of something a coworker of mine wrote. Classy, Jason.
Not even sure how "Thanks, ElevenWarriors, for giving this insignificant douchebag some more publicity." could even be construed as "ripping on" you.
I hope you're not working toward an actual career in journalism, Jason. Falsely "exposing" your readers is almost as detrimental to a journalists career as being ridiculously thin-skinned.
Sorry RockKing (awesome name, btw), you became a douche the minute you admitted to writing the following under a fake name:
"This particular blog entry, as well as a good number of the comments to it, was written with little knowledge of the situation. I find that to be rather irresponsible, pompous, and detrimental to whatever eventual success this blog may have in itâ€™s future."
So, now this is a co-worker. Sorry if we assume everything from the same IP addy is still you, especially when you already admitted to the above.
We don't go spamming your site and calling you folks out. The only thing I can remember ever commenting at your place was that the new redesign looked great when you relaunched. So between your above referenced comments regarding Pryor and Rick stopping by to cry about us putting up a post about Eddie George's penis, we have somewhat of a trend here.
Yes, thin-skinned and a sophomore in journalism. Oh noes.. Please don't take us off your blogroll.
I'm the one who wrote the comment about "This particular blog entry". Yeah, I used my real name then, and I used a fake name now. (Oh god, the humanity, people on the internet may not be quite who they seem???)
Here's a clue...
In an office environment, much like the one you aspire to work in someday, multiple, if not all, workstations will be operating under the same IP address. I happen to work in the same office (No, not the offices for waitingfornextyear.com, we actually have real jobs, thanks) as RockKing.
Sure, there is really no way to prove to you that I am Craig and he is RockKing, you'd just have to take our word on it. But I'm sure that since you already used your super-sleuth IP lookup skills, and don't want to eat your own words, you'll just go ahead and continue to slander my co-worker's blog anyway, despite the fact that the comments that you are "retaliating" to hardly even warrant such an action.
Keep letting that professionalism shine, Jason!
Jason, when did I admit to writing anything under a fake name? What is your problem with me? I don't recall every saying anything bad about your site. Ever.
If RockKing is really RockKing does that mean that Hazel is really DoucheKing?
And RockKing (if you really are RockKing).....every man is judge by the company he keeps, simple logic would show that you are more than likely friends with DoucheKing...er Hazel...er whatever he...er you want to call yourself. Just as we are all eager to jump on any athlete or celebrity who has douche bags for friends, we to (as a society) judge each other by those whom we associate with. It's called "guilt by association." It may not be fair but that is the way it is. The only way to avoid this.....tell your friend to stop acting like a douche bag because he is making you look bad....at least thatâ€™s what I hear the grown-ups are doing.
Well, I honestly don't know how to prove that I am just myself. But if you think about it, as a blogger myself, why would I go around ripping on other people's sites? Particularly a site I read every single day and generally enjoy? It's just poor form.
As for "Hazel", all I did was send him a link to that Rosenhaus video because I thought it was interesting. I'm sorry, and I will stop sending people links to your site since I don't know how they're going to react to them and what comments they might leave.
This is really just a big misunderstanding that I got stuck in the middle of.
What did I do that classifies as "Acting like a douchebag"?
I disagreed with your posting of 2 entries, the one where you call TP an attention whore (P.S. check out http://www.pittsburghlive.com/...), and this particular one, giving facetime to Drew Rosenhaus, of all people.
So is that how it is? You're going to resort to name-calling, not only toward people who disagree with you, but people who just work in the same office as them?
What are your comment sections for, exactly? Are they strictly for compliments, blowjobs, and lollipops? If so, you'd be better served to simply delete the comments you don't like, rather than reply to them with insults and childish name-calling like a 19 year old kid.
Whoa! Whoa! Whoa! Hazel.....just because Antonio Henton is one of our players does not mean that we, as tOSU fans, want people to silicate us BJ's on the sites that we go to in search of sports (mainly tOSU) â€œknowledge.â€ Please keep your personal life out of this.
And by the way, thanks for giving us that insight as to what your "real job" is.
Off the subject.....does anybody miss those old ESPN commercials about the guy and his "knowledge?"
So, no real response to my comments?
Pretty much what I expected.
Enjoy college, boys.
Wow, I go away for one morning and everybody wakes up with a case of the Mondays!
Hazel, Do you think Drew tells his clients to become problems off the field? It seems to me that Chad and TO are two individuals who forget they play in a team sport. I know people do not think highly of Drew, but you have to admire what he has made of himself and the life he has. I would trade my left arm to have his job, clout and his knack for self promotion.
Making comments like this:
"This particular blog entry, as well as a good number of the comments to it, was written with little knowledge of the situation. I find that to be rather irresponsible, pompous, and detrimental to whatever eventual success this blog may have in its future."
ARE what make you a douche bag Craig. Not only did you judge the people providing this terrific blogsite, but you also bashed the people who were commenting on it. The fact that you are bashing people who might be potential readers of waitingfornextyear.com, since these to sites do have links to each other, also makes you a hypocrite. You see, you stated:
I hope youâ€™re not working toward an actual career in journalism, Jason. Falsely â€œexposingâ€ your readers is almost as detrimental to a journalistâ€™s career as being ridiculously thin-skinned.
Yet, you had previously bashed the readers on this site for having "little knowledge of the situation" and said that you "find that to be rather irresponsible, pompous, and detrimental to whatever eventual success this blog may have in its future."
So I ask you, why do I need to give you a real response when you do such a good job in making an ass out of yourself without my help?
And, Craig I believe that YOU never gave a real response last time once I proved that you were "Falsely exposing" me as having "little knowledge" of the situation that I was commenting on.
As the Blog Turns...
If this were a soap opera we would now find out that Jason and Craig are long lost identical twin brothers that were seperated at birth.....but then Craig would kidnap Jason and use this blog for his own "evil" purposes....and then Chris would find out that Craig was really Jason's evil twin posing as him and tell Corey that he needed to meet with him in secret, but Craig would be there 1st and hit him with a shovel and Chris would be in a coma for 13 minutes and wake up with amnesia....but not the real kind, he would have the kind where the only thing he forgot was that Craig was pretending to be Jason, and Corey would slowly get clues to what Chris was going to tell him and finally catch Craig, then he would pull of Craig's mask and it would be the amusement park owner, and he would say "and I would have gotten away with it to if it weren't for you kids!"
I got 3 hours of sleep last night, can you tell?
Yet, you had previously bashed the readers on this site for having â€œlittle knowledge of the situationâ€ and said that you â€œfind that to be rather irresponsible, pompous, and detrimental to whatever eventual success this blog may have in its future.â€
No, Go back and read that comment again, son. I never said anything about the READERS of this site. That comment was directed toward the WRITER of that article.
There is a big difference between disagreeing with someone, and just throwing a personal attack.
Pointing out that an article was written without adequate knowledge of the substance at hand is a form of disagreement, and criticism.
Calling someone a douchebag is just a personal attack, and childish.
Elevenwarriors is occasionally a fine place to read buckeye news and opinion. If you want to keep it that way, and build on it, I would suggest being more open to criticism, and less worried about firing back high school insults every time someone disagrees with you. If that is too much to ask, then at least try to ignore posts that piss you off. Namecalling makes you look unprofessional. I think Corey gets the idea. From him, I always see class and at least some level of care for what readers have to say in the comment sections.
Notice how you never see writers on deadspin and the big lead calling their readers "douchebags" in the comment sections?
I'm hoping your buddy RockKing filled you in on a little of the background with the "misunderstanding", but considering you're back here at 7PM to talk some more shit, I'm doubting it.
In your first-ever comment here, you accused me and the commenters of being irresponsible and pompous. When that happens, we'll reply in kind to defend ourselves. There are no editors here, no ombudsman. This is not the fish wrap you're used to reading and if you talk some smack, be prepared to get it back. George Strode is not here to make sure you donâ€™t get your feelings hurt. Disagreeing with what we say is one thing, personal attacks, another.
The flare-up today, which I greatly regret, was related to a comment I made on WFNY asking if RockKing was Craig from the Pryor post. He said he was that Craig. So I saw the same host (starts with "ohio" and there's no Craig or Hazel on the company website, which does list employees, by the way) on the comment this morning thanking us for posting the Rosenhaus video.
I thought it was RockKing and decided that I was tired of the drive by pseudonym sniping and responded. Harsh, perhaps, but it's done. RockKing claims that his reply confirming he was Craig was a misunderstanding and I believe him. I apologize for dragging his (and Rickâ€™s) name through the mud.
Point taken about the Deadspin and Big Lead writers, but take your time and read through our comments. Iâ€™ve only responded like that twice and both times were directed at things you said. So is that me or you?
Glad you admit when you're wrong. That is respectable.
And it doesn't matter if its just me or not, you should never throw personal attacks at ANY reader. You're the writer. People come here to read what you write, leave their own thoughts, and discuss them with others. The moment the writer comes back and calls the reader a douchebag (My comments especially didn't deserve that, its not like I am trolling you. My post was a blast on rosenhaus much more than it was on you), you start to lose credibility. Lets face it, as cool as we all thought we were in high school, nobody wants to read what high school kids want to say, and when you start name-calling, you start looking like a high schooler.
Hazel, you are call us classless, childish, and acting like we are in highschool. Yet you make remarks such as:
"What are your comment sections for, exactly? Are they strictly for compliments, blowjobs, and lollipops?"
and seem to have no problem with them. I don't ask that you act more mature or come up with better comebacks......just choose one. You cannot have your cake and eat it too, otherwise you will end up asking some crazy guy that thinks he invented the internet to be your running mate as you flip-flop on every arguement and look like a idiot.
Also you are not my dad, so do not call me son. You told me to read the comment again because you wer directing your comment towards the writer....well I quoted your comment for you once and it looks like I'll have to do it again beacause apparently YOU need to read it again:
â€œThis particular blog entry, as well as a good number of the comments to it, was written with little knowledge of the situation. I find that to be rather irresponsible, pompous, and detrimental to whatever eventual success this blog may have in its future.â€
I'm pretty sure right in the first line you start in about the comments the readers are posting.
Furthermore, calling Jason, myself and others 19 year olds, childish, classless, and high schoolers is also a form of "namecalling."
Now are you man enough to admit when YOU are wrong?
Hey man, When you write ill-informed articles, expect to be called out. That is usually the purpose of a comment section, you know, to comment on what you think about the article. Sorry for using it for what it is used for. Taking that criticism and firing back with personal attacks is classless and childish though, and you'll notice, as I said before, you wont see the writers on established blogsites pull any stunts like that. Work to be better, man! I want this site to succeed too!
Also, where did I call you guys those names? I referred to your actions as childish and classless. I did not make a personal attack at anyone. There is a difference. Your confusion may be due to a lack of reading comprehension and critical thinking skills. I'm beginning to thing that is the theme around here.
Jason claims he is a journalism sophomore. I was 19 most of my sophomore year in college. Sorry if he's 20. My bad, didn't mean to insult him by calling him 19, oh the humanity!
What's poorly written about the article? It's a "Have a Good Weekend Post." The only text of the article "This guy knows a thing or two about talent" is a valid statement. How Rosenhaus' track record with problem athletes looks is moot. It's a video of him talking about Pryor...
The retaliation was over the line, but your initial comment, Hazel/Craig, was unfounded. Unless you can explain how the actual article itself is "ill-informed."
Sorry dave, we're talking about two different articles.
Thanks for clearing that up Jason. The whole basis for this confusion was the fact that you asked, "Was this you?" and then sent a link to a comment section in which I had indeed commented. How was I to know you were actually asking if I was Craig? Anyway, I'm glad its cleared up and I consider this issue a dead one.
I'm pretty sure claiming:
"Your confusion may be due to a lack of reading comprehension and critical thinking skills."
IS a personal attack at me.....and I AM NOT the writer of this article nor do I work for 11W.....and for the 800th time I will quote you again:
Again, in this comment, you are clearly attacking the readers who comment on this site. I've notice how you have avoided this subject every time Jason or myself have brought it up..... please step down from your soapbox, Craig. I'm more inclined to believe that the creators of this site have more of a right to say whatever they want and fire back at comments they dislike because they are the ones that work on it. You however are coming across as a know it all @$$hole who cannot admit when they makeâ€¦..shall we say â€œlittle knowledge of the situation.â€
Letâ€™s see, you seem to fancy yourself on knowing everything and donâ€™t seem to admit when you are wrongâ€¦.so now that itâ€™s become painfully obvious that you plan to avoid the issue that YOU were bashing the readers and their comments letâ€™s move on to another comment you just made:
â€œJason claims he is a journalism sophomore. I was 19 most of my sophomore year in college. Sorry if heâ€™s 20. My bad, didnâ€™t mean to insult him by calling him 19, oh the humanity!â€
Letâ€™s see where you went wrong hereâ€¦.Iâ€™ll give you some quotes from the 11W â€œabout usâ€ page:
â€œThis site is the byproduct of two three grown-ass men that put way too much emphasis on college athleticsâ€
19 and 20 year olds are hardly grown ass menâ€¦.now how about this one:
â€œSome of the older Buckeye netizens may remember a site from the mid to late nineties called Chris Spielmanâ€™s Dirty Socks. That was our first foray into this realm, but internet publishing capabilities were awkward at best and that site was discontinued.â€
So letâ€™s see, if Jason is 20 and Chris Spielmanâ€™s Dirty Socks was created in 1999 at the latestâ€¦.the that means he was 11 we he helped start that sightâ€¦â€¦WOW he must be like a child prodigy or somethingâ€¦.and before you say kids are on the internet all the time now a days, think backâ€¦..in 1999 they were notâ€¦.how do I know, because in 1999 I was a freshman in college and did not have a computer of my own just as most of my friends did not.
Well, it looks like my â€œlack of reading comprehension and critical thinking skillsâ€ can only be matched by your inability to perform simple mathematical functions such as addition and subtraction.
Again, are you man enough to admit when you are wrong?
Probably not, Iâ€™m willing to bet you will continue to avoid the issues that you are incorrect on and again point out that the writers shouldnâ€™t be commenting on the readerâ€™s opinions/comments.
Also, I have to put out the irony of you saying my "confusion may be due to a lack of reading comprehension and critical thinking skills.â€ When it was you who failed to pick up on Jason's sarcasm and took what he said literally.
uhhhm, that's "point out" not "put out".......looks like you would have been better off attacking my writing skills.
Whatever you say, Wil.
I refuse to believe you are over the age of 21.
Youâ€™re right of course, I must be no older than 21. Itâ€™s obvious; why else would I point out your uninformed statements, fallacies, hypocrisies, and disagree with you while trying to point out to you that you are no better than those you are critiquing? It must be because I am know older than 21, no one over the age of 21 would dare do those things for fear of being embarrassed by your wealth of knowledge and formidable wit.
Seriously man, get over yourself.
If you feel the need to tell me that I'm in high school or can't read, or whatever you want to say, go ahead and get the last word. Iâ€™m not going to waste my time with you anymore, as your arguments hold no weight.
You haven't pointed out any uninformed statements, fallacies, or hypocrisies, you've just made false accusations about me personally attacking people, when the only thing I have attacked are actions, and knowledge. Those aren't personal attacks, chief. All the while you have been using the tactics, writing style, and eloquence of an 18 or 19 year-old. It's really not my fault.
Craig/Hazel, this next comment is not meant to prolong this arguement. I only leaves this to show how I pointed out your uninformed statements, fallacies, or hypocrisies.
Apparently I had not made it clear enough for you.
However, you must see the irony in stating that I have made continued "false accusations about me (you) personally attacking people" and in the following sentence you state that I have the "eloquence of an 18 or 19 year-old."
1st Uninformed statement:
Claiming that the readers of this blog were not knowledgeable of the Terrelle Pryor situation. (Many readers, including myself, backed up their opinions with facts.)
2nd Uninformed statement:
Claiming that Jason is a 19 or 20 year old when he clearly is not. (I know this for a fact we have mutual friends)
Claiming that the writers of a blog cannot or should not fire back at readers as it will have be â€œdetrimental to whatever eventual success this blog may have in its future.â€ (That is simply your opinion some people may in fact enjoy that)
Continually diverting the subject when Jason or I pointed out that you DID bash the readerâ€™s comments.
Claiming that the comments other readers leave have little knowledge of the situation, when YOU also leave comments when you have little knowledge of the situation you are commenting on.
Complaints that the comments other readers and the writers are personal attacks while you continually attack me personally. I am, in actuality, 27 and do feel it is a personal attack when you call me a 19 or 20 year old; especially when you have no justification to back that up other than I agreed that you were a douche bag. (And yes that is your fault; no one else is controlling you. Learn to accept responsibility for your actions.)
Calling some of my comments childish when you make comments such as this:
â€œWhat are your comment sections for, exactly? Are they strictly for compliments, blowjobs, and lollipops?â€
And if there are any grammatical errors in my posts, get over it! I immediately post what I write. I do not spell or grammar check it. You have had grammatical errors in some of your posts also. However, as it was brought up by a previous blogger, this is a comments section, it happens. People are usually typing in a hurry.
VIEW ALL »
Scarlet and Gray, Every Day.
Quite simply, Eleven Warriors is the largest free Ohio State site on the internet. We're committed to remaining free and delivering you the Buckeye news and analysis you deserve.
Our Story | Meet the Staff
© 2006-2013 Eleven Warriors LLC.
Eleven Warriors is not affiliated with The Ohio State University. View full disclaimer.
The easiest way for you to contribute is to join the community. Signing up for a new account is 100% free, takes seconds and allows you to comment, participate in the forum and create your own blog posts.
If you'd like to support us with your wallet, you can: buy one of our amazing shirts or shop Amazon with this link. (Your prices remain the same and we get a commission).
We love hearing from you! Whether you want to work with us, discuss advertising opportunities, or pass us a hot tip, you're more than welcome to drop us a line.