Baas=Heitmann=Snyder=Rags...and then there's Wallace

Originally posted by oldninerdude:

Originally posted by hondakillerzx:

Originally posted by oldninerdude:

Originally posted by hondakillerzx:

Originally posted by oldninerdude:

Originally posted by hondakillerzx:

Originally posted by oldninerdude:

Originally posted by hondakillerzx:

Originally posted by oldninerdude:

Originally posted by hondakillerzx:

Originally posted by oldninerdude:

Originally posted by MadDog49er:

Originally posted by oldninerdude:

Originally posted by MadDog49er:
You guys can stick your head in the sand all you want. However, when week after week, writer after writer, and sportscaster after sportscasters make flattering statements about his play, at some point you have to abandon "the earth is square" philosophy.

Just admit you cannot fairly analyze his play, admit you have a bias against him, and move on. For myself, I'm just joining the rest of the civilized world in my assessment.

By the way, I'm sure MB has zero access to those in the organization who feel that Heitmann is a pretty damn good player....MD said with dripping sarcasm.

Cheers.

Listen, I'm not the one who called Heitmann a p***y.

Beerows did.

And, by your admittedly blind adherence to anything anyone writes about Heitmann (except us independents on the webzone), you did too.

Let's see, who is likely be less biased in their assessment of a player,

(a) those who consider what they've seen of his play and base their assessment on that, or

(b) those who apparently start off with some odd manlove for the guy, those who ignore his actual play over several years, those who rely on anything they can find that might be even a little flattering about the guy (while ignoring any criticism), and, those who angrily chastise anyone who might question, even in the slightest, Heitmann's play by making huge exaggerations about what they are actually saying?

Answer: a. (I'll give you the teacher's version of the test, with the answer included.)

So, "week after week," huh. Who wrote anything flattering about Heitmann's play last week? The week before? And the week before? The week before? Answer: No one. This is just more gross exaggeration and hyperbole. Aside from the most recent few lines from MB yesterday, where he called Heitmann a p***y (not exactly flattery), you're relying on stuff that's at least two years old.

MB might have access to the coaching staff and the other players, but you don't know if he's specifically talked to any of them about Heitmann and his play. You're just assuming that they'd say good stuff. Blindly making a huge leap of faith, and ignoring reality.

And you think we have our heads in the sand?

MB's recent few lines, quoted by you above, indicate that Heitmann is not assertive and lacks in aggression. "He's so unassuming." That's exactly what we've been saying--that he needs to step up, play with more of an attitude, be more aggressive, especially on important, short yardage downs.

If you'd pull your own head out of wherever it may be buried, actually pay attention to what we've been saying, and stop with the hysterical overstatements, maybe you'd recognize that we're not condemning Heitmann, we're simply pointing out that he may no longer be the best player on a very poor OL.

Cause the OL's not gonna be as bad as it was, hopefully, due to the infusion of new talent and new coaching. Capice? What part of that is "the earth is square" unreasonable? Answer: None of it.

You are a pretty bright guy, but this response was one of the stupidest responses I have ever heard. I hope you can get your emotions in check and backtrack.

You end your response with "we're not condemning Heitmann", but you start your response implying that he is a "p*ssy". How do you rectify these two comments. But, I digress......

Let's revisit MB's chat to see how your bias has blinded you so far that the English language is becoming incomprehensible to you. Here is the question and answer, once again:

Q:
Is there any chance David Baas could challenge Eric Heitmann for his job as the starting Center? Given Baas' record at Michigan and recognition he received as a Center there.

Friday May 28, 2010 12:42 Six-Ace-Deuce
12:43 MattB_49: Heitmann is one of the most underrated centers in the league. He's so unassuming. My joke is that if he starts a locker-room fistfight and the news gets picked up by ESPN and Pro Football Talk, he'll go to his first Pro Bowl. if the 49ers reach the playoffs, in fact, I definitely can see Heitmann going to Hawaii

How in God's green earth did you translate "unassuming" to being a "p*ssy"? You did read..... "the news gets picked up by ESPN and Pro Football Talk", which obviously does not question his toughness, but exposure on a national level. He is saying that Heitmann goes about his job quietly, and therefore....wait for the bell...is "one of the most underrated centers in the league". And, that if the Niners go to the playoff, he will get.....exposure. Any other interpretation is moronic, especially one that tries to imply that he is soft.

Please defend how you somehow came to the conclusion that MB was questioning his toughness, or pull back and admit that your comment was stupid. I'll give you a mulligan, and we can move on.

Boy, Maddog, you're usually not as obtuse as this post makes you seem.

Look at EVERYTHING MB says. He mentions that Heitmann is more than just "unassuming," he says he's "SO" unassuming--meaning even more than usually unassuming or quiet. He's saying that Heitmann is quieter than the usual quiet guy, less assertive than a regular wallflower, nonaggressive even more than a normally passive guy. (In other words, he's a wuss.)

Come on. Your reading comprehension is better than that. You can see that MB has "damned Heitmann with faint praise."

He says that "IF he starts a locker room fight, and it gets picked up on ESPN, etc., THEN he'll go to the pro bowl." In other words, if the most passive, least aggressive, most unassuming guy in the locker room ever starts a fight, and it's picked up by the media, then and only then he might go to the pro bowl.

That does not sound like MB is willing to wager heavily on Heitmann going to the pro bowl anytime soon, or starting a fistfight either, for that matter.

MB is saying that, although he likes Heitmann, he finds Heitmann to be extremely passive, very nonaggressive. He's essentially called Heitmann a p***y. Frankly, that's NOT a good thing in a professional football player, no matter how you try to spin it.

I didn't call Heitmann a p***y. I said that MB had politely called him that. (And he did.) Try not to put words that I didn't write into my posts and you'll have less trouble understanding them.

BTW, I hope all is well with you. You said that my post was "one of the stupidest you've ever heard." I sincerely hope that doesn't mean your vision is suffering in any way, that someone had to read my post aloud to you.

And you give me way too much credit. I've read, and written, many much stupider posts.

i dunno man, when i read that barrows quote i took it as meaning that heitman is so low key that a fist fight would get him noticed for his strong play and get him into the probowl. like hes an unknown and a noise maker like that fist fight would get him noticed. thats how i perceived it anyway.

Then you're reading far more into it that is there.

I could be wrong. I mean, I only have a MA in English from UCLA, a BA in English from Cal (Go Bears!), taught High School English for a number of years, and spend my time now writing briefs and arguments. So maybe I'm misreading it. But I don't think so.

And you're missing the point. MB's articles are interesting, but he's hardly an expert on OL play. I don't know that I've ever read an article by him that focuses, solely, on Heitmann or Heitmann's play. Are we to assume, therefore, that he doesn't think Heitmann is important enough, good enough, to merit such an article?

And why can't we depend on our own eyes? I can think of a number of plays in the past three years where Heitmann got pushed back into the backfield on an important, short yardage play. And how many fourth an one's have the Niners succeeded at in the past several years--when they try to run it or sneak it up the middle. None.

I don't give a fig about whether MB or MM think Heitmann's a swell guy or not. I'm sure he is. But there's a problem there, whether anyone wants to acknowledge it or not. It could be just an attitude problem, or a lack of attitude--but whatever it is, Solari and Brown have to address it. IMHO.

no need to be a dick and throw your degrees in my face man. you perceive it your way and ill perceive it mine. im with maddogg on this one. he wouldnt be a starting NFL lineman let alone one of our captains every year if he was a p***y.

Sorry to have offended.

I agree with you, but I am not the one who called him a p***y, or words to that effect, in the first place. MB was, in his article--even if you don't choose to see it.

Its called "damning with faint praise," and its a way to say one thing, and mean something else. MB did so in his post, outwardly praising Heitmann, but also calling him, politely, a very meek, mild, modest, unassertive guy.

Sounds like he called him a p***y to me, but feel free to believe/perceive it any way you want.

Again, sorry to have offended. Didn't realize you were so unassuming.

so your basically doing that to me now is that it? people who need to throw their possessions, and yes an education is a possession in other peoples faces and try to belittle them when they know nothing about them are very petty. i hope you enjoy your own company here because no one else does. perceive that anyway way you want sir. good day to you

Well, surprise, surprise.

I guess you perceive "so unassuming" to be somewhat insulting, after all.

Go figure.

really dude? after you just told us what you think it means and then you use it against me im not gonna know what your talking about? i guess you didnt take any logic classes while you were getting your super genius of the universe degree

Why so thin skinned about education? I only mentioned two degrees I earned studying English to let you know that I may have some idea about the nuances of what MB had written. That I'm not just making stuff up.

Same reason I mentioned that I once worked as a HS English teacher. You think I'm flaunting that, throwing it in your face for some reason? Like teaching English is some really important position? If you are a football coach, or a journalist, it might lend some credibility and interest to the discussion. But I can't mention my background or experience cause it hurts your feelings?

You totally missed the point, again.

As to my last post to you, I was just trying to illustrate for you my point. You don't think MB's description of Heitmann could be interpreted as meaning "Heitman's a p***y, or weak, or a milktoast." Yet when I used MB's words to describe you, you get all upset--hence my point. The words CAN mean what I said.

"You're so unassuming" can mean, you're too passive, too unaggressive, too weak, a wuss, etc. If not, they why would you get upset? (BTW, I don't know you at all, so I have no idea if you're "unassuming" in any way. Don't take it so personal--I was just trying to show you what was meant.)

Bottom line: you jumped in on an ongoing argument, took a side. And now you're surprised, and angry, that you get challenged as well? An old saying seems appropriate: If you don't like the heat, stay out of the kitchen.

nothin against your education man, you just tried to throw that in everyones face because you took barrows statements one way and everyone who says otherwise is wrong. you told us what you think it means and then you directed it towards me, thats all im saying. if you just defined something the way you see it and then use it againt me it doesnt take an idiot to realise what you mean.

Your post presents some opportunities for sarcastic, smart ass replies, but it is not, and never was, my intention to offend you--or to throw anything into anyone's face.

I never called Heitmann a p***y. I just pointed out that what MB had written could be interpreted that way. You argued that Heitmann is not a p***y, and that MB's words couldn't mean that. So I tried to illustrate the point for you, directly.

Your reaction shows that the words "so unassuming" can be interpreted as meaning "weak, timid, a wuss, etc." That's all I was trying to show you.

But you go right ahead and believe everything Maddog is posting:

"Heitmann is the greatest center, ever. He has no weaknesses in his game, or his teammates would not elect him captain.

"Heitmann never loses at the LOS, or he wouldn't have been the starter all these years.

"Heitmann has never been pushed back into the backfield, and anyone who thinks they might have seen an instance of that in a game is hallucinating, drunk, or crazy. Or so biased against Heitmann for no reason that they are making stuff up.

"Heitmann didn't miss that block on Rocky Bernard, cause if he had, someone would have written a column about it.

"Every member of the media, across the entire country, thinks Heitmann is the best offensive lineman in the NFL. All he has to do is start a fistfight, and they'd all come out and say so.

"Now that we have replacements for Baas and Snyder, Heitmann will completely dominate every NT and DT in the league, cause it was those two guys holding him back all this time.

"Anyone who questions Heitmann's abilities, even slightly, actually hates him, personally, and is trying to murder his wife, kill his dog, and kidnap his children."

All this, plus Maddog has some very nice beachfront property on the Gulf Coast that he'd gladly sell you for a very reasonable price.

How dare I, a mere former English teacher, question any of that, or disagree with it in any way? (I'd caution you about the real estate deal, though.)

youve obviously lost this argument and are resorting to sarcasm and mudslinging to try to back up your tough guy claims. i agree with maddog on this post, me and him have had differences on this forum on many different threads and weve agreed on many different threads but we were always civilized about it instead of getting defensive and spiteful when one of us has the other hand in an argument. your just being childish. why dont you listen to maddog and make a poll about how people take your statement so we can see if your degree is worth anything? im sure UCLA would be pretty embarrassed if they found out the result of your poll.

Originally posted by oldninerdude:

Originally posted by hondakillerzx:

Originally posted by oldninerdude:

Originally posted by hondakillerzx:

Originally posted by oldninerdude:

Originally posted by hondakillerzx:

Originally posted by oldninerdude:

Originally posted by hondakillerzx:

Originally posted by oldninerdude:

Originally posted by hondakillerzx:

Originally posted by oldninerdude:

Originally posted by MadDog49er:

Originally posted by oldninerdude:

Originally posted by MadDog49er:
You guys can stick your head in the sand all you want. However, when week after week, writer after writer, and sportscaster after sportscasters make flattering statements about his play, at some point you have to abandon "the earth is square" philosophy.

Just admit you cannot fairly analyze his play, admit you have a bias against him, and move on. For myself, I'm just joining the rest of the civilized world in my assessment.

By the way, I'm sure MB has zero access to those in the organization who feel that Heitmann is a pretty damn good player....MD said with dripping sarcasm.

Cheers.

Listen, I'm not the one who called Heitmann a p***y.

Beerows did.

And, by your admittedly blind adherence to anything anyone writes about Heitmann (except us independents on the webzone), you did too.

Let's see, who is likely be less biased in their assessment of a player,

(a) those who consider what they've seen of his play and base their assessment on that, or

(b) those who apparently start off with some odd manlove for the guy, those who ignore his actual play over several years, those who rely on anything they can find that might be even a little flattering about the guy (while ignoring any criticism), and, those who angrily chastise anyone who might question, even in the slightest, Heitmann's play by making huge exaggerations about what they are actually saying?

Answer: a. (I'll give you the teacher's version of the test, with the answer included.)

So, "week after week," huh. Who wrote anything flattering about Heitmann's play last week? The week before? And the week before? The week before? Answer: No one. This is just more gross exaggeration and hyperbole. Aside from the most recent few lines from MB yesterday, where he called Heitmann a p***y (not exactly flattery), you're relying on stuff that's at least two years old.

MB might have access to the coaching staff and the other players, but you don't know if he's specifically talked to any of them about Heitmann and his play. You're just assuming that they'd say good stuff. Blindly making a huge leap of faith, and ignoring reality.

And you think we have our heads in the sand?

MB's recent few lines, quoted by you above, indicate that Heitmann is not assertive and lacks in aggression. "He's so unassuming." That's exactly what we've been saying--that he needs to step up, play with more of an attitude, be more aggressive, especially on important, short yardage downs.

If you'd pull your own head out of wherever it may be buried, actually pay attention to what we've been saying, and stop with the hysterical overstatements, maybe you'd recognize that we're not condemning Heitmann, we're simply pointing out that he may no longer be the best player on a very poor OL.

Cause the OL's not gonna be as bad as it was, hopefully, due to the infusion of new talent and new coaching. Capice? What part of that is "the earth is square" unreasonable? Answer: None of it.

You are a pretty bright guy, but this response was one of the stupidest responses I have ever heard. I hope you can get your emotions in check and backtrack.

You end your response with "we're not condemning Heitmann", but you start your response implying that he is a "p*ssy". How do you rectify these two comments. But, I digress......

Let's revisit MB's chat to see how your bias has blinded you so far that the English language is becoming incomprehensible to you. Here is the question and answer, once again:

Q:
Is there any chance David Baas could challenge Eric Heitmann for his job as the starting Center? Given Baas' record at Michigan and recognition he received as a Center there.

Friday May 28, 2010 12:42 Six-Ace-Deuce
12:43 MattB_49: Heitmann is one of the most underrated centers in the league. He's so unassuming. My joke is that if he starts a locker-room fistfight and the news gets picked up by ESPN and Pro Football Talk, he'll go to his first Pro Bowl. if the 49ers reach the playoffs, in fact, I definitely can see Heitmann going to Hawaii

How in God's green earth did you translate "unassuming" to being a "p*ssy"? You did read..... "the news gets picked up by ESPN and Pro Football Talk", which obviously does not question his toughness, but exposure on a national level. He is saying that Heitmann goes about his job quietly, and therefore....wait for the bell...is "one of the most underrated centers in the league". And, that if the Niners go to the playoff, he will get.....exposure. Any other interpretation is moronic, especially one that tries to imply that he is soft.

Please defend how you somehow came to the conclusion that MB was questioning his toughness, or pull back and admit that your comment was stupid. I'll give you a mulligan, and we can move on.

Boy, Maddog, you're usually not as obtuse as this post makes you seem.

Look at EVERYTHING MB says. He mentions that Heitmann is more than just "unassuming," he says he's "SO" unassuming--meaning even more than usually unassuming or quiet. He's saying that Heitmann is quieter than the usual quiet guy, less assertive than a regular wallflower, nonaggressive even more than a normally passive guy. (In other words, he's a wuss.)

Come on. Your reading comprehension is better than that. You can see that MB has "damned Heitmann with faint praise."

He says that "IF he starts a locker room fight, and it gets picked up on ESPN, etc., THEN he'll go to the pro bowl." In other words, if the most passive, least aggressive, most unassuming guy in the locker room ever starts a fight, and it's picked up by the media, then and only then he might go to the pro bowl.

That does not sound like MB is willing to wager heavily on Heitmann going to the pro bowl anytime soon, or starting a fistfight either, for that matter.

MB is saying that, although he likes Heitmann, he finds Heitmann to be extremely passive, very nonaggressive. He's essentially called Heitmann a p***y. Frankly, that's NOT a good thing in a professional football player, no matter how you try to spin it.

I didn't call Heitmann a p***y. I said that MB had politely called him that. (And he did.) Try not to put words that I didn't write into my posts and you'll have less trouble understanding them.

BTW, I hope all is well with you. You said that my post was "one of the stupidest you've ever heard." I sincerely hope that doesn't mean your vision is suffering in any way, that someone had to read my post aloud to you.

And you give me way too much credit. I've read, and written, many much stupider posts.

i dunno man, when i read that barrows quote i took it as meaning that heitman is so low key that a fist fight would get him noticed for his strong play and get him into the probowl. like hes an unknown and a noise maker like that fist fight would get him noticed. thats how i perceived it anyway.

Then you're reading far more into it that is there.

I could be wrong. I mean, I only have a MA in English from UCLA, a BA in English from Cal (Go Bears!), taught High School English for a number of years, and spend my time now writing briefs and arguments. So maybe I'm misreading it. But I don't think so.

And you're missing the point. MB's articles are interesting, but he's hardly an expert on OL play. I don't know that I've ever read an article by him that focuses, solely, on Heitmann or Heitmann's play. Are we to assume, therefore, that he doesn't think Heitmann is important enough, good enough, to merit such an article?

And why can't we depend on our own eyes? I can think of a number of plays in the past three years where Heitmann got pushed back into the backfield on an important, short yardage play. And how many fourth an one's have the Niners succeeded at in the past several years--when they try to run it or sneak it up the middle. None.

I don't give a fig about whether MB or MM think Heitmann's a swell guy or not. I'm sure he is. But there's a problem there, whether anyone wants to acknowledge it or not. It could be just an attitude problem, or a lack of attitude--but whatever it is, Solari and Brown have to address it. IMHO.

no need to be a dick and throw your degrees in my face man. you perceive it your way and ill perceive it mine. im with maddogg on this one. he wouldnt be a starting NFL lineman let alone one of our captains every year if he was a p***y.

Sorry to have offended.

I agree with you, but I am not the one who called him a p***y, or words to that effect, in the first place. MB was, in his article--even if you don't choose to see it.

Its called "damning with faint praise," and its a way to say one thing, and mean something else. MB did so in his post, outwardly praising Heitmann, but also calling him, politely, a very meek, mild, modest, unassertive guy.

Sounds like he called him a p***y to me, but feel free to believe/perceive it any way you want.

Again, sorry to have offended. Didn't realize you were so unassuming.

so your basically doing that to me now is that it? people who need to throw their possessions, and yes an education is a possession in other peoples faces and try to belittle them when they know nothing about them are very petty. i hope you enjoy your own company here because no one else does. perceive that anyway way you want sir. good day to you

Well, surprise, surprise.

I guess you perceive "so unassuming" to be somewhat insulting, after all.

Go figure.

really dude? after you just told us what you think it means and then you use it against me im not gonna know what your talking about? i guess you didnt take any logic classes while you were getting your super genius of the universe degree

Why so thin skinned about education? I only mentioned two degrees I earned studying English to let you know that I may have some idea about the nuances of what MB had written. That I'm not just making stuff up.

Same reason I mentioned that I once worked as a HS English teacher. You think I'm flaunting that, throwing it in your face for some reason? Like teaching English is some really important position? If you are a football coach, or a journalist, it might lend some credibility and interest to the discussion. But I can't mention my background or experience cause it hurts your feelings?

You totally missed the point, again.

As to my last post to you, I was just trying to illustrate for you my point. You don't think MB's description of Heitmann could be interpreted as meaning "Heitman's a p***y, or weak, or a milktoast." Yet when I used MB's words to describe you, you get all upset--hence my point. The words CAN mean what I said.

"You're so unassuming" can mean, you're too passive, too unaggressive, too weak, a wuss, etc. If not, they why would you get upset? (BTW, I don't know you at all, so I have no idea if you're "unassuming" in any way. Don't take it so personal--I was just trying to show you what was meant.)

Bottom line: you jumped in on an ongoing argument, took a side. And now you're surprised, and angry, that you get challenged as well? An old saying seems appropriate: If you don't like the heat, stay out of the kitchen.

nothin against your education man, you just tried to throw that in everyones face because you took barrows statements one way and everyone who says otherwise is wrong. you told us what you think it means and then you directed it towards me, thats all im saying. if you just defined something the way you see it and then use it againt me it doesnt take an idiot to realise what you mean.

Your post presents some opportunities for sarcastic, smart ass replies, but it is not, and never was, my intention to offend you--or to throw anything into anyone's face.

I never called Heitmann a p***y. I just pointed out that what MB had written could be interpreted that way. You argued that Heitmann is not a p***y, and that MB's words couldn't mean that. So I tried to illustrate the point for you, directly.

Your reaction shows that the words "so unassuming" can be interpreted as meaning "weak, timid, a wuss, etc." That's all I was trying to show you.

But you go right ahead and believe everything Maddog is posting:

"Heitmann is the greatest center, ever. He has no weaknesses in his game, or his teammates would not elect him captain.

"Heitmann never loses at the LOS, or he wouldn't have been the starter all these years.

"Heitmann has never been pushed back into the backfield, and anyone who thinks they might have seen an instance of that in a game is hallucinating, drunk, or crazy. Or so biased against Heitmann for no reason that they are making stuff up.

"Heitmann didn't miss that block on Rocky Bernard, cause if he had, someone would have written a column about it."

"Every member of the media, across the entire country, thinks Heitmann is the best offensive lineman in the NFL. All he has to do is start a fistfight, and they'd all come out and say so.

"Now that we have replacements for Baas and Snyder, Heitmann will completely dominate every NT and DT in the league, cause it was those two guys holding him back all this time.

"Anyone who questions Heitmann's abilities, even slightly, actually hates him, personally, and is trying to murder his wife, kill his dog, and kidnap his children."

All this, plus Maddog has some very nice beachfront property on the Gulf Coast that he'd gladly sell you for a very reasonable price.

How dare I, a mere former English teacher, question any of that, or disagree with it in any way? (I'd caution you about the real estate deal, though.)

I see why Maddog is mad. He's blind.That fat ass Rocky Bernard went RIGHT BY Heitmann and the LG on that play was already occupied. So who's man was that?

Heitmann's man. Hence missed block.

Honestly though OM9er let these guys continue to kiss Heitmann's butt. he's not Pro Bowl material. Never has been. He MAY turn it around this year but I'm willing to bet that he'll be exposed like no other before him has been exposed.

Think of it like this, they're sticking up for a guy when there is CLEAR evidence taped, showing that he misses blocks.

If Heitmann was all that he would have made the Pro Bowl. It amazes me that people stick up for Heitmann when Harris was constantly thrown under the bus. But I guess Harris was so bad it made Heitmann look good.

Just let it go man, honda and Maddog are trolling. That's all they're doing.

~Ceadder

Originally posted by MadDog49er:
Since we are throwing degrees around here, I'll toss in my two master's and say that any interpretation of MB's chat as a criticism in Heitmann manhood is bunk...and you know it. Just concede it was a stupid statement and move on. The more you hold onto it, the more foolish you appear to all people on this board.

If you think you are so right in your interpretation, run a poll. You are going to lose the poll on your interpretation 90%-10%, and get laughed off the board.

Finally, I find funny the quotes around my "statements". If you were intellectually honest (I think that boat has long sailed away), you would find that I have never made any of the statements you have typed. I will state for the 1000th time, just to refresh your memory, that Eric Heitmann is a very good football player. I have never stated he is a great football player, never stated he is a Pro-Bowler, never stated that he grades out perfectly, never stated that he is unblemished.

What I have stated is the obvious: When everyone surrounding the organization comes to the same consensus: That Heitmann has been a very good player the past two years (which I have chronicled from their own words in this thread, in the "Eric Heitmann is a Good Football Player" thread, and many others threads that have been started by the same cast of characters (know anyone?) who either belittle his play, or character (the "motivation" angle as stated in this thread is another of the classic boneheaded statements...as if the team captain is a slacker), or manlihood ("I'm not the one calling him a p*ssy"...actually you are, because any two-bit moron could interpret MB's statement as one describing Heitmann's low key nature...not his weak play).

In recap:
1) Please ask UCLA for a refund because you obviously are struggling to interpret something a 1st grader could comprehend.
2) Own up to your own bias against Heitmann
3) Play fairly with comments from others (by making up false statements, you only weaken your argument)

Just concede defeat, and move on.

Now who's throwing his education in people's faces?

All I've done with your "statements" is what you have done, throughout this thread, to the posts of pasodoc, me, and others: overstate them. Now you say that's not playing fair? That's rather hypocritical, isn't it? Yes, that ship has long since sailed for you as well.

An excellent example of such hypocrisy is the bolded, above. You admit that Heitmann is not perfect, or unblemished, or mistake free, etc. Yet when others--pasodoc, Ceadder, me, etc.--try to talk about any problem we are concerned about with his play, you come in with the "your bias and/or hatred against Heitmann blinds you to reality" BS.

As to the MB quote, and its interpretation, the words MB wrote stand for themselves. You brought them to our attention. Its difficult to believe that anyone with even a little bit of sense could not comprehend that the statement "He's so unassuming" is an indication that the subject (Heitmann) is very retiring, very modest, extremely passive, etc. Especially so in the context of the rest of the quote. MB wrote it, all I did was restate it, to draw your attention to the fact that it is not just praise, it is also criticism.

But at least I did not then, and am not now, attempting to pretend the more critical interpretation does not even exist. Just how intellectually honest is it to ignore an interpretation that is critical of Heitmann, just because it doesn't happen to support your position, whatever that actually is.

Rather than run a poll, why don't we let Heitmann's play establish the facts. If he's as good as you seem to think everyone around says he is, then we won't see him lose any battles at the LOS, won't see him get pushed into the backfield.

If, on the other hand, he has that problem of a lack of "bad attitude" or what Ceadder called "nasty attitude" and doesn't play as well as we all hope, then we'll see that as well, cause it will mean more failure on fourth and one, or on short yardage third downs. No one's hoping for that; quite the contrary.

However, I believe Caedderman makes a valid point, one cannot coach "nasty." If a player lacks the inner drive to succeed, its difficult to instill it in him. If a guy is "so unassuming," so very passive, so lacking in aggression, that even the media takes note of it, then it seems possible that he might also lack that bad, nasty attitude that it takes to win those one on one battles at the LOS when it's important to do so.

A "low key attitude" could very well translate into weak play, if such an attitude is one the player takes onto the field with him. Never seen an offensive or defensive lineman succeed for long, at any level, with a "low key, laid back" attitude.

This issue should be a concern for every Niner fan, whether you want us to talk about it or not.

i tried once to end this thread amicably, but failed so will try again. EVERYONE has a vested interest in Heitmann playing well...hopefully great, even, and NOBODY wants to see our starting C fail. As for how good/bad Heit is, the season will speak volumes about it, without a word being written on the zone. For my part i will applaud heit when he plays well. As someone else mentioned, with decent to superior talent on either side of him, heit may very well look like a totally different player. From personal experience, it is no fun playing any organized ball (or hockey) when everyone around you is a klutz, or at least, short on talent. That pretty well describes our most recent 7 yr OL. IF heit comes thru, this could be one helluva yr to be a 9er fan, because that would mean HVT(hi value talent) OT to OT, with a fairly decent TE on one end, and a capable blocker on the other. And you know alex is going to look like a completely different qb with a real OL in front of him. If he plays well, so do the RBs, TEs, and WRs. Lastly, if O is cooking, you know the D is going to finally get a breather, and no more 40 minutes of gametime for them. They will do better too, and winning won't all be on them.

It has been a long time coming, but the pieces are in place to have that yr we all have wanted to have for so long. The talent is so good on this OL that anyone not measuring up will stand out. Hopefully that is nobody. Everyone on the squad has a lot riding on hiet playing well...alex, most of all, but same goes for bigMIke and to some extent baalke. You know the rest of the OL wants heit to play great, because then the entire OL will get their due.

Quite honestly, let's bury the heit hatchet, and bring on the season. I cannot wait for the first preseason game, for heaven's sakes. I am jacked about this team, and basically it all has to do with our two first rd picks. IF those guys play lites out, say by game 4, maybe 5 or 6, then we should be one brass knuckle team to have to play. It would really to nice to be feared once again. This could be the pivot yr.

Originally posted by pasodoc9er:
i tried once to end this thread amicably, but failed so will try again. EVERYONE has a vested interest in Heitmann playing well...hopefully great, even, and NOBODY wants to see our starting C fail. As for how good/bad Heit is, the season will speak volumes about it, without a word being written on the zone. For my part i will applaud heit when he plays well. As someone else mentioned, with decent to superior talent on either side of him, heit may very well look like a totally different player. From personal experience, it is no fun playing any organized ball (or hockey) when everyone around you is a klutz, or at least, short on talent. That pretty well describes our most recent 7 yr OL. IF heit comes thru, this could be one helluva yr to be a 9er fan, because that would mean HVT(hi value talent) OT to OT, with a fairly decent TE on one end, and a capable blocker on the other. And you know alex is going to look like a completely different qb with a real OL in front of him. If he plays well, so do the RBs, TEs, and WRs. Lastly, if O is cooking, you know the D is going to finally get a breather, and no more 40 minutes of gametime for them. They will do better too, and winning won't all be on them.

It has been a long time coming, but the pieces are in place to have that yr we all have wanted to have for so long. The talent is so good on this OL that anyone not measuring up will stand out. Hopefully that is nobody. Everyone on the squad has a lot riding on hiet playing well...alex, most of all, but same goes for bigMIke and to some extent baalke. You know the rest of the OL wants heit to play great, because then the entire OL will get their due.

Quite honestly, let's bury the heit hatchet, and bring on the season. I cannot wait for the first preseason game, for heaven's sakes. I am jacked about this team, and basically it all has to do with our two first rd picks. IF those guys play lites out, say by game 4, maybe 5 or 6, then we should be one brass knuckle team to have to play. It would really to nice to be feared once again. This could be the pivot yr.

jumbo formation with two TE two RBs should be pretty damn hard to stop with Staley-Iupati-Heitman-Rachal-Davis up front. i think this line will be a strong point of the team by the end of the year when they gel

Honda, i'll be disappointed if they don't gel before end of season. With 2 guys coaching the OL with 49er DNA in them, i just don't see them going a whole season before putting it all together. First few games might be interesting, however. I hope we play the rams twice early, but know we aren't that lucky.

Originally posted by pasodoc9er:
Honda, i'll be disappointed if they don't gel before end of season. With 2 guys coaching the OL with 49er DNA in them, i just don't see them going a whole season before putting it all together. First few games might be interesting, however. I hope we play the rams twice early, but know we aren't that lucky.

im justr going by how its been lately. our lines have started shaky and finished better after midseason but thats because weve had injuries pretty regularly on the line lately. hopefully this year is different

Truth, brother, and a hex on injuries. Ever notice how a dinged up OL frequently seems to be short of talent to begin with?