Tulane Thwarts Cajuns' Rally, 9-6

[CajunEXPRESS]

Generally I try to curb my disappointment in players who don’t live up to the hype. I confess I’ve messed up on that too often this past year. Still if they’re doing what coaches ask, and are good citizens it’s on the coaches if they’re not good enough. We asked virtually every player, said you’re good enough.

[Rougarou]

We are now 15 deep that have played in the field. Who in the hell else is he going to dig from? Who said anything about benching Hayden this year? And for the record, I have never said he should be benched, what I have said was that if others were givin the opportunities he has been given to fail and know they would continue to play, they may have a better chance of succeeding. Todd Lott was one. Some people on this board can't read the English language and are so protective they fail to see or understand the point being made. You can twist things the way you want, however the post you made was and remains ignorant. See Dad04 response.

Vic I went back and did some reading and owe you an apology. You never did actually call for Hayden to be benched last year. I mixed you up with Joe LeBlanc who actually did call for Hayden to be benched for Lochridge. I think I assumed it was you based on your reaction to my earlier post saying you wanted to say for the record you never called for Hayden to be benched when I never mentioned you or was referring to you. That confused me. Which is a common occurrence.

You did subsequently agree that Joe's position was a viable one based on their stats at the time between Hayden and Loch. Which is not the same as calling for Hayden to be benched, but basically saying that Joe's take was not unreasonable. There were a couple of other posters who felt Hayden should be benched.

So for me saying you called for him to be benched was incorrect. I apologize for that. Your position was that had other guys like Lott, Hannie, Loch, and Frank been given the same opportunities as Hayden, they probably would have done better. Which is likely. Although they wouldn't have done as well as Hayden in my opinion.

You definitely seemed to have a problem with Hayden as you continually referred to him being placed on a pedestal, and denied him being invited to the Cape was anything special because the coaches set it up. I don't agree with that. That does seem like it is critical of Robe as he is the only one who could have placed him on the pedestal as the lineup was his decision. If that wasn't your intention, my bad, I don't know who else would be responsible for that inequity that you seemed to have an issue with. It was Robe's pedestal to place the player on.

My point was that perhaps the coaches are giving Hayden that chance for a reason. The reason being he has the highest ceiling and gives the team the best chance to win when he is on the field. And I think the coaches were correct in their decision, which I think you would agree with for the most part.

Anyway, I wanted to set it straight as I was wrong on one of my facts there.

I'm not Adam Schiff. Promise.

[CajunVic]

Vic I went back and did some reading and owe you an apology. You never did actually call for Hayden to be benched last year. I mixed you up with Joe LeBlanc who actually did call for Hayden to be benched for Lochridge. I think I assumed it was you based on your reaction to my earlier post saying you wanted to say for the record you never called for Hayden to be benched when I never mentioned you or was referring to you. That confused me. Which is a common occurrence.

You did subsequently agree that Joe's position was a viable one based on their stats at the time between Hayden and Loch. Which is not the same as calling for Hayden to be benched, but basically saying that Joe's take was not unreasonable. There were a couple of other posters who felt Hayden should be benched.

So for me saying you called for him to be benched was incorrect. I apologize for that. Your position was that had other guys like Lott, Hannie, Loch, and Frank been given the same opportunities as Hayden, they probably would have done better. Which is likely. Although they wouldn't have done as well as Hayden in my opinion.

You definitely seemed to have a problem with Hayden as you continually referred to him being placed on a pedestal, and denied him being invited to the Cape was anything special because the coaches set it up. I don't agree with that. That does seem like it is critical of Robe as he is the only one who could have placed him on the pedestal as the lineup was his decision. If that wasn't your intention, my bad, I don't know who else would be responsible for that inequity that you seemed to have an issue with. It was Robe's pedestal to place the player on.

My point was that perhaps the coaches are giving Hayden that chance for a reason. The reason being he has the highest ceiling and gives the team the best chance to win when he is on the field. And I think the coaches were correct in their decision, which I think you would agree with for the most part.

Anyway, I wanted to set it straight as I was wrong on one of my facts there.

I'm not Adam Schiff. Promise.

Thanks and that is a fair recitation. I had two points.

1. Most are not given the opportunities 5 has received over the last two years considering early performance. Everyone has to give it to 5 for staying the course and performing as he has done to finish the last two years. Yes, the coach was right in that respect. Furthermore, you are correct that getting those chances is not and should not be a knock on the player.

2. While that was going on, so many kids were in the constant revolving door where they knew not from one day to another if they would be in a lineup. It is hard as hell to pull out of slumps when you don't have a reasonable opportunity to play this game for some extended time. 5 did not have to deal with that.

And yes, I did feel that Robe was pressing the last couple of years and that may have cost us players not ever getting to their optimum capabilities. How we were able to keep Lott for that third year after the way he was treated in the first two Is mind boggling.

On a final note, when some on here have propped 5 up like he can do no wrong, I have pointed out additional facts/stats which show the full picture. Nothing more, nothing less.

Edit: Roug, that’s a lot of work to check on me. Thanks for doing that and not acting like a couple of other dip($)hits have done here earlier in this thread.

[Dad04]

I was also very surprised we had Lott three years.

[CajunT]

Thanks and that is a fair recitation. I had two points.

1. Most are not given the opportunities 5 has received over the last two years considering early performance. Everyone has to give it to 5 for staying the course and performing as he has done to finish the last two years. Yes, the coach was right in that respect. Furthermore, you are correct that getting those chances is not and should not be a knock on the player.

2. While that was going on, so many kids were in the constant revolving door where they knew not from one day to another if they would be in a lineup. It is hard as hell to pull out of slumps when you don't have a reasonable opportunity to play this game for some extended time. 5 did not have to deal with that.

And yes, I did feel that Robe was pressing the last couple of years and that may have cost us players not ever getting to their optimum capabilities. How we were able to keep Lott for that third year after the way he was treated in the first two Is mind boggling.

On a final note, when some on here have propped 5 up like he can do no wrong, I have pointed out additional facts/stats which show the full picture. Nothing more, nothing less.

Edit: Roug, that’s a lot of work to check on me. Thanks for doing that and not acting like a couple of other dip($)hits have done here earlier in this thread.

I don't think that the kid could do no wrong, it's just at some point some of the comments become overkill when it comes to Cantrelle. You guys act like players in the past like Conrad, Strenzt or Adams didn't go into slumps' or play with attitudes. Cantrelle has been called a punk and other names, I don't recall Conrad or any of the players in 2014 being called those names for playing similarly, or coloring their hair. The most noticeable difference is that team won and the talent in that lineup allowed players to play through slumps and poor games. Cantrelle doesn't have that luxury, there has been very little talent around him since he walked in the door.

While he may have been given more chances in the lineup than others, it has paid off for the coaches in the long run. Talk to Babs, or JT and ask them how Cantrelle practices daily and his commitment to the game. The difference between him and the others that you say haven't gotten the opportunities is what he does daily and what they weren't doing at practice.

Since Lucroy has played here , there have been 2 players that garnered top of the draft projections, Trahan and Conrad. Hayden Cantelle is the third now to garner such attention. I'm willing to look at stats, but let's look at the stats of the players around him as well. No, he is not perfect but he certainly is no punk and he plays the game the right way. And had this program won more with him on the roster, most of the personal BS would not been posted on this site.

[CajunVic]

I don't think that the kid could do no wrong, it's just at some point some of the comments become overkill when it comes to Cantrelle. You guys act like players in the past like Conrad, Strenzt or Adams didn't go into slumps' or play with attitudes. Cantrelle has been called a punk and other names, I don't recall Conrad or any of the players in 2014 being called those names for playing similarly, or coloring their hair. The most noticeable difference is that team won and the talent in that lineup allowed players to play through slumps and poor games. Cantrelle doesn't have that luxury, there has been very little talent around him since he walked in the door.

While he may have been given more chances in the lineup than others, it has paid off for the coaches in the long run. Talk to Babs, or JT and ask them how Cantrelle practices daily and his commitment to the game. The difference between him and the others that you say haven't gotten the opportunities is what he does daily and what they weren't doing at practice.

Since Lucroy has played here , there have been 2 players that garnered top of the draft projections, Trahan and Conrad. Hayden Cantelle is the third now to garner such attention. I'm willing to look at stats, but let's look at the stats of the players around him as well. No, he is not perfect but he certainly is no punk and he plays the game the right way. And had this program won more with him on the roster, most of the personal BS would not been posted on this site.

Not a Damn thing you posted here has anything to do with me. Why in the hell did you post that as a reply to me? You pulled that c(r)@p last year and it was unfounded then. It’s post by people like you that draws the ire. You do him no favors.

Good Night and Back to The Game.

[Dad04]

5 is is the eventual all state player on a LL team of scrubs.

[CajunT]

Not a Damn thing you posted here has anything to do with me. Why in the hell did you post that as a reply to me? You pulled that c(r)@p last year and it was unfounded then. It’s post by people like you that draws the ire. You do him no favors.

Good Night and Back to The Game.

Is this not your post?

"1. Most are not given the opportunities 5 has received over the last two years considering early performance. Everyone has to give it to 5 for staying the course and performing as he has done to finish the last two years. Yes, the coach was right in that respect. Furthermore, you are correct that getting those chances is not and should not be a knock on the player.

2. While that was going on, so many kids were in the constant revolving door where they knew not from one day to another if they would be in a lineup. It is hard as hell to pull out of slumps when you don't have a reasonable opportunity to play this game for some extended time. 5 did not have to deal with that.

And yes, I did feel that Robe was pressing the last couple of years and that may have cost us players not ever getting to their optimum capabilities. How we were able to keep Lott for that third year after the way he was treated in the first two Is mind boggling.

On a final note, when some on here have propped 5 up like he can do no wrong, I have pointed out additional facts/stats which show the full picture. Nothing more, nothing less.

Edit: Roug, that's a lot of work to check on me. Thanks for doing that and not acting like a couple of other dip($)hits have done here earlier in this thread."

It has every damn thing to do with you! You make statements about his extra chances he has received and the players that have left through a revolving doors. Be specific, what players and what extra chances has he received? You are not just giving stats to prove a point, but throwing out accusations that can't be proven, or unproven. You did this ____ last season, along with that ____ Leblanc. You got something to say, spill it. Or, stop throwing ____ at the wall to see what sticks.

[CajunVic]

Is this not your post?

"1. Most are not given the opportunities 5 has received over the last two years considering early performance. Everyone has to give it to 5 for staying the course and performing as he has done to finish the last two years. Yes, the coach was right in that respect. Furthermore, you are correct that getting those chances is not and should not be a knock on the player.

2. While that was going on, so many kids were in the constant revolving door where they knew not from one day to another if they would be in a lineup. It is hard as hell to pull out of slumps when you don't have a reasonable opportunity to play this game for some extended time. 5 did not have to deal with that.

And yes, I did feel that Robe was pressing the last couple of years and that may have cost us players not ever getting to their optimum capabilities. How we were able to keep Lott for that third year after the way he was treated in the first two Is mind boggling.

On a final note, when some on here have propped 5 up like he can do no wrong, I have pointed out additional facts/stats which show the full picture. Nothing more, nothing less.

Edit: Roug, that's a lot of work to check on me. Thanks for doing that and not acting like a couple of other dip($)hits have done here earlier in this thread."

It has every damn thing to do with you! You make statements about his extra chances he has received and the players that have left through a revolving doors. Be specific, what players and what extra chances has he received? You are not just giving stats to prove a point, but throwing out accusations that can't be proven, or unproven. You did this ____ last season, along with that ____ Leblanc. You got something to say, spill it. Or, stop throwing ____ at the wall to see what sticks.

You are totally off base again and obviously blind to anything about this subject. Sorry you have the red _____. This post shows your inability to read any post that says anything about 5 blindly and openly. You impute things that are not said and can’t comprehend things that are. Can’t help you anymore. Also, if you have a problem with Leblanc, take that up with him, not me.

[CajunT]

You are totally off base again and obviously blind to anything about this subject. Sorry you have the red _____. This post shows your inability to read any post that says anything about 5 blindly and openly. You impute things that are not said and can’t comprehend things that are. Can’t help you anymore. Also, if you have a problem with Leblanc, take that up with him, not me.

You post nonsense and then pretend you didn't post it. Are you that oblivious to the things you post and say on this site, or do you suffer from dementia? You posted it, own it!