In depth look at the team

Originally posted by fryet:

Originally posted by buck:

Originally posted by MadDog49er:
Only the ding-dongs hate Heitmann (even though he was the best lineman on the team last year), so it not even worthy putting on your review. I'd edit that right out.

You might want to include some of the backups fighting for a spot on the team. How about:
1) Barry Sims- with one M. Possibly the most evil person to put on a Niners jersey since Derek Smith or Kwame Harris. Only a handful of terrible people think he will make the team, including MD. Yikes!! Run for the hills!!

2) Alex Boone- One of the greatest players in the modern NFL. Future starter and ten time Pro-Bowler.

3) Jacob Bender- Would be a much better player if he changed his name to Zeigler or Clayton or Lelie. Unfortunately, he stubbornly insists on keeping his current name.

Cheers.

P.S. I'll be hosting the first annual 49ers Webzone Spelling Bee soon. Some words for the board to work on (we'll start with the tough four letter words first): Sims, Baas. I told you they were tough! We will then increasingly move to MENSA level words: Heitmann, Zeigler.

I promise to not include former 49ers player: Babatunde Oshinowo. However, his roster replacement Chris Francies is fair game.

While you are working on the spelling, you might want to think about taking on the writing skills of our webzoners.

An example (from your post).

Only the ding-dongs hate Heitmann (even though he was the best lineman on the team last year), so it not even worthy putting on your review. I'd edit that right out.

Your use of it is incorrect.

It is a pronoun. Pronouns replace nouns. The noun that a pronoun replaces is called an antecedent. Every pronoun must have an antecedent, and that antecedent must be clearly and immediately understandable.

In your sentence, the pronoun it, which is singular, does not have an antecedent.

If Heitman were the antecedent, the pronoun would be him.

Dingdongs can not be the antecedent. The word "dingdongs" is plural and therefore the proper antecedent would be they, not it.


Furthermore, the pronoun it is the subject of the clause. Every subject must have a verb. The verb that is missing is "be." Be should be either in the present tense (is) or the past tense (was).

As a teacher, and as the self-appointed webzone authority on writing, you really should do much better than this.

Your grade on your post can not be more than a solid D. The skills exhibited just do not match the attitude embedded in your post.

Back to class.

I think the "it" was referring to the controversy that he was expecting to occur. If it was referring to Heitmann than I think it would be "he" not "him". I do agree that a verb is missing.

If you have to think, as in you are not sure, about what the the "it" is referring to, the sentence is not, or was not, written well.

It would be he if the it is the subject of the clause and it would be him if the it were the object in the clause.

Since what Maddog wrote was not comprehensible, it is hard to know for sure, if the it was a subject or the object. But based upon position, I assume that it was a subject.

There are more mistakes in the original post. I did not talk about them because this is a football, not a English composition, forum. But, if necessary I will continue with the lessons in basic English usage.

I do this work for a living. I train teachers how to teach TOEFL, GRE, and GMAT classes. And, to tell the truth my spelling is atrocious.

Is this English or football chat?

Originally posted by buck:

Originally posted by fryet:

Originally posted by buck:

Originally posted by MadDog49er:
Only the ding-dongs hate Heitmann (even though he was the best lineman on the team last year), so it not even worthy putting on your review. I'd edit that right out.

You might want to include some of the backups fighting for a spot on the team. How about:
1) Barry Sims- with one M. Possibly the most evil person to put on a Niners jersey since Derek Smith or Kwame Harris. Only a handful of terrible people think he will make the team, including MD. Yikes!! Run for the hills!!

2) Alex Boone- One of the greatest players in the modern NFL. Future starter and ten time Pro-Bowler.

3) Jacob Bender- Would be a much better player if he changed his name to Zeigler or Clayton or Lelie. Unfortunately, he stubbornly insists on keeping his current name.

Cheers.

P.S. I'll be hosting the first annual 49ers Webzone Spelling Bee soon. Some words for the board to work on (we'll start with the tough four letter words first): Sims, Baas. I told you they were tough! We will then increasingly move to MENSA level words: Heitmann, Zeigler.

I promise to not include former 49ers player: Babatunde Oshinowo. However, his roster replacement Chris Francies is fair game.

While you are working on the spelling, you might want to think about taking on the writing skills of our webzoners.

An example (from your post).

Only the ding-dongs hate Heitmann (even though he was the best lineman on the team last year), so it not even worthy putting on your review. I'd edit that right out.

Your use of it is incorrect.

It is a pronoun. Pronouns replace nouns. The noun that a pronoun replaces is called an antecedent. Every pronoun must have an antecedent, and that antecedent must be clearly and immediately understandable.

In your sentence, the pronoun it, which is singular, does not have an antecedent.

If Heitman were the antecedent, the pronoun would be him.

Dingdongs can not be the antecedent. The word "dingdongs" is plural and therefore the proper antecedent would be they, not it.


Furthermore, the pronoun it is the subject of the clause. Every subject must have a verb. The verb that is missing is "be." Be should be either in the present tense (is) or the past tense (was).

As a teacher, and as the self-appointed webzone authority on writing, you really should do much better than this.

Your grade on your post can not be more than a solid D. The skills exhibited just do not match the attitude embedded in your post.

Back to class.

I think the "it" was referring to the controversy that he was expecting to occur. If it was referring to Heitmann than I think it would be "he" not "him". I do agree that a verb is missing.

If you have to think, as in you are not sure, about what the the "it" is referring to, the sentence is not, or was not, written well.

It would be he if the it is the subject of the clause and it would be him if the it were the object in the clause.

Since what Maddog wrote was not comprehensible, it is hard to know for sure, if the it was a subject or the object. But based upon position, I assume that it was a subject.

There are more mistakes in the original post. I did not talk about them because this is a football, not a English composition, forum. But, if necessary I will continue with the lessons in basic English usage.

I do this work for a living. I train teachers how to teach TOEFL, GRE, and GMAT classes. And, to tell the truth my spelling is atrocious.

If you have to think, as in you are not sure, about what the the "it" is referring to, the sentence is not, or was not, written well. This sentence is poorly written and could use parentheses. For example, "the sentence is (or was not)."

It would be he if the it is the subject of the clause and it would be him if the it were the object in the clause.

Since what Maddog wrote was not comprehensible, it is hard to know for sure, if the it was a subject or the object. But based upon position, I assume that it was a subject. Unnecessary comma after "sure."

There are more mistakes in the original post. I did not talk about them because this is a football, not a English composition, forum. But, if necessary I will continue with the lessons in basic English usage. You could do without the "a" before "English." Comma after "composition" is useless. You should have one comma after "necessary."

I do this work for a living. I train teachers how to teach TOEFL, GRE, and GMAT classes. And, to tell the truth my spelling is atrocious. I don't recommend starting a sentence with "And." Comma would be nice after "truth." "You" could be included after "tell". It is possible that you forgot to include it.

You do this for a living? Dude, stick to posting on forums.

I am sure going to regret some cuts this year. Too many guys that have some real ability lacking only the playing time. I saw a lot to like in the OL, RBs and DBs. I think the niners gave up on the notion of hiding Nate Davis. For him to be judged slow sounds pretty foolish at this point. I think for his accuracy, he is remarkable in the range of easy tosses to lightning bolts. The fact he chooses each pass for it's need and do it with accuracy and timing is amazing. If he were even a top pick I would think very few coaches would play him for a full half. He must be showing the coaches a lot to cut needed qb time of Alex and Hill. There is a lot to like about Nate Davis like his handoffs are very crisp and it seems all the balls are shoved into the backs stomach pouch. I noticed that many of his passes are near the optimum point where the reciever was open. This guy has a knack. If he plays for a running team he could be a major winner as I think he is the type who can win with his arm if needed but he is not married to his ego and his arm. In other words, I do not think he would force balls into bad situations. I am surprised at his judgment and quick choices. Oh I really like Brit Miller and am sort of curious as to how they plan on using their fullbacks. Norris is either being sort of shelved per Frank Gore or he is being phased out. The guys like Miller and that other guy look pretty good.

Originally posted by B650:

Originally posted by buck:

Originally posted by fryet:

Originally posted by buck:

Originally posted by MadDog49er:
Only the ding-dongs hate Heitmann (even though he was the best lineman on the team last year), so it not even worthy putting on your review. I'd edit that right out.

You might want to include some of the backups fighting for a spot on the team. How about:
1) Barry Sims- with one M. Possibly the most evil person to put on a Niners jersey since Derek Smith or Kwame Harris. Only a handful of terrible people think he will make the team, including MD. Yikes!! Run for the hills!!

2) Alex Boone- One of the greatest players in the modern NFL. Future starter and ten time Pro-Bowler.

3) Jacob Bender- Would be a much better player if he changed his name to Zeigler or Clayton or Lelie. Unfortunately, he stubbornly insists on keeping his current name.

Cheers.

P.S. I'll be hosting the first annual 49ers Webzone Spelling Bee soon. Some words for the board to work on (we'll start with the tough four letter words first): Sims, Baas. I told you they were tough! We will then increasingly move to MENSA level words: Heitmann, Zeigler.

I promise to not include former 49ers player: Babatunde Oshinowo. However, his roster replacement Chris Francies is fair game.

While you are working on the spelling, you might want to think about taking on the writing skills of our webzoners.

An example (from your post).

Only the ding-dongs hate Heitmann (even though he was the best lineman on the team last year), so it not even worthy putting on your review. I'd edit that right out.

Your use of it is incorrect.

It is a pronoun. Pronouns replace nouns. The noun that a pronoun replaces is called an antecedent. Every pronoun must have an antecedent, and that antecedent must be clearly and immediately understandable.

In your sentence, the pronoun it, which is singular, does not have an antecedent.

If Heitman were the antecedent, the pronoun would be him.

Dingdongs can not be the antecedent. The word "dingdongs" is plural and therefore the proper antecedent would be they, not it.


Furthermore, the pronoun it is the subject of the clause. Every subject must have a verb. The verb that is missing is "be." Be should be either in the present tense (is) or the past tense (was).

As a teacher, and as the self-appointed webzone authority on writing, you really should do much better than this.

Your grade on your post can not be more than a solid D. The skills exhibited just do not match the attitude embedded in your post.

Back to class.

I think the "it" was referring to the controversy that he was expecting to occur. If it was referring to Heitmann than I think it would be "he" not "him". I do agree that a verb is missing.

If you have to think, as in you are not sure, about what the the "it" is referring to, the sentence is not, or was not, written well.

It would be he if the it is the subject of the clause and it would be him if the it were the object in the clause.

Since what Maddog wrote was not comprehensible, it is hard to know for sure, if the it was a subject or the object. But based upon position, I assume that it was a subject.

There are more mistakes in the original post. I did not talk about them because this is a football, not a English composition, forum. But, if necessary I will continue with the lessons in basic English usage.

I do this work for a living. I train teachers how to teach TOEFL, GRE, and GMAT classes. And, to tell the truth my spelling is atrocious.

If you have to think, as in you are not sure, about what the the "it" is referring to, the sentence is not, or was not, written well. This sentence is poorly written and could use parentheses. For example, "the sentence is (or was not)."

It would be he if the it is the subject of the clause and it would be him if the it were the object in the clause.

Since what Maddog wrote was not comprehensible, it is hard to know for sure, if the it was a subject or the object. But based upon position, I assume that it was a subject. Unnecessary comma after "sure."

There are more mistakes in the original post. I did not talk about them because this is a football, not a English composition, forum. But, if necessary I will continue with the lessons in basic English usage. You could do without the "a" before "English." Comma after "composition" is useless. You should have one comma after "necessary."

I do this work for a living. I train teachers how to teach TOEFL, GRE, and GMAT classes. And, to tell the truth my spelling is atrocious. I don't recommend starting a sentence with "And." Comma would be nice after "truth." "You" could be included after "tell". It is possible that you forgot to include it.

You do this for a living? Dude, stick to posting on forums.

Thanks b650, I was thinking the same thing. And Buck, while some folks might not agree with all of MD's analysis/conclusions/etc., I for one find most of his stuff enlightening and often entertaining. And since it's about the 9ers and that's why I am, here, what's the problem? And that old saying about "he who is with out sin..."? Check out your use of "...a English composition...".

Originally posted by prometheus:
I am sure going to regret some cuts this year. Too many guys that have some real ability lacking only the playing time. I saw a lot to like in the OL, RBs and DBs. I think the niners gave up on the notion of hiding Nate Davis. For him to be judged slow sounds pretty foolish at this point. I think for his accuracy, he is remarkable in the range of easy tosses to lightning bolts. The fact he chooses each pass for it's need and do it with accuracy and timing is amazing. If he were even a top pick I would think very few coaches would play him for a full half. He must be showing the coaches a lot to cut needed qb time of Alex and Hill. There is a lot to like about Nate Davis like his handoffs are very crisp and it seems all the balls are shoved into the backs stomach pouch. I noticed that many of his passes are near the optimum point where the reciever was open. This guy has a knack. If he plays for a running team he could be a major winner as I think he is the type who can win with his arm if needed but he is not married to his ego and his arm. In other words, I do not think he would force balls into bad situations. I am surprised at his judgment and quick choices. Oh I really like Brit Miller and am sort of curious as to how they plan on using their fullbacks. Norris is either being sort of shelved per Frank Gore or he is being phased out. The guys like Miller and that other guy look pretty good.

I think RJF and mitchell, and Egboh even are going to make the decisions tough. Then we have our safeties as well. Interesting people. Then Boone and some of the other Olinement will be tough decisions as well. I wonder what will happen to Sims.

udated

Originally posted by nyfl9erfan:

Originally posted by B650:

Originally posted by buck:

Originally posted by fryet:

Originally posted by buck:

Originally posted by MadDog49er:
Only the ding-dongs hate Heitmann (even though he was the best lineman on the team last year), so it not even worthy putting on your review. I'd edit that right out.

You might want to include some of the backups fighting for a spot on the team. How about:
1) Barry Sims- with one M. Possibly the most evil person to put on a Niners jersey since Derek Smith or Kwame Harris. Only a handful of terrible people think he will make the team, including MD. Yikes!! Run for the hills!!

2) Alex Boone- One of the greatest players in the modern NFL. Future starter and ten time Pro-Bowler.

3) Jacob Bender- Would be a much better player if he changed his name to Zeigler or Clayton or Lelie. Unfortunately, he stubbornly insists on keeping his current name.

Cheers.

P.S. I'll be hosting the first annual 49ers Webzone Spelling Bee soon. Some words for the board to work on (we'll start with the tough four letter words first): Sims, Baas. I told you they were tough! We will then increasingly move to MENSA level words: Heitmann, Zeigler.

I promise to not include former 49ers player: Babatunde Oshinowo. However, his roster replacement Chris Francies is fair game.

While you are working on the spelling, you might want to think about taking on the writing skills of our webzoners.

An example (from your post).

Only the ding-dongs hate Heitmann (even though he was the best lineman on the team last year), so it not even worthy putting on your review. I'd edit that right out.

Your use of it is incorrect.

It is a pronoun. Pronouns replace nouns. The noun that a pronoun replaces is called an antecedent. Every pronoun must have an antecedent, and that antecedent must be clearly and immediately understandable.

In your sentence, the pronoun it, which is singular, does not have an antecedent.

If Heitman were the antecedent, the pronoun would be him.

Dingdongs can not be the antecedent. The word "dingdongs" is plural and therefore the proper antecedent would be they, not it.


Furthermore, the pronoun it is the subject of the clause. Every subject must have a verb. The verb that is missing is "be." Be should be either in the present tense (is) or the past tense (was).

As a teacher, and as the self-appointed webzone authority on writing, you really should do much better than this.

Your grade on your post can not be more than a solid D. The skills exhibited just do not match the attitude embedded in your post.

Back to class.

I think the "it" was referring to the controversy that he was expecting to occur. If it was referring to Heitmann than I think it would be "he" not "him". I do agree that a verb is missing.

If you have to think, as in you are not sure, about what the the "it" is referring to, the sentence is not, or was not, written well.

It would be he if the it is the subject of the clause and it would be him if the it were the object in the clause.

Since what Maddog wrote was not comprehensible, it is hard to know for sure, if the it was a subject or the object. But based upon position, I assume that it was a subject.

There are more mistakes in the original post. I did not talk about them because this is a football, not a English composition, forum. But, if necessary I will continue with the lessons in basic English usage.

I do this work for a living. I train teachers how to teach TOEFL, GRE, and GMAT classes. And, to tell the truth my spelling is atrocious.

If you have to think, as in you are not sure, about what the the "it" is referring to, the sentence is not, or was not, written well. This sentence is poorly written and could use parentheses. For example, "the sentence is (or was not)."

It would be he if the it is the subject of the clause and it would be him if the it were the object in the clause.

Since what Maddog wrote was not comprehensible, it is hard to know for sure, if the it was a subject or the object. But based upon position, I assume that it was a subject. Unnecessary comma after "sure."

There are more mistakes in the original post. I did not talk about them because this is a football, not a English composition, forum. But, if necessary I will continue with the lessons in basic English usage. You could do without the "a" before "English." Comma after "composition" is useless. You should have one comma after "necessary."

I do this work for a living. I train teachers how to teach TOEFL, GRE, and GMAT classes. And, to tell the truth my spelling is atrocious. I don't recommend starting a sentence with "And." Comma would be nice after "truth." "You" could be included after "tell". It is possible that you forgot to include it.

You do this for a living? Dude, stick to posting on forums.

Thanks b650, I was thinking the same thing. And Buck, while some folks might not agree with all of MD's analysis/conclusions/etc., I for one find most of his stuff enlightening and often entertaining. And since it's about the 9ers and that's why I am, here, what's the problem? And that old saying about "he who is with out sin..."? Check out your use of "...a English composition...".

MadDog originally complained about the WebZone's spelling in general. Buck thought MadDog was being overtly pedantic, therefore, he pointed out grammar errors in MadDog's own post, to make an ironic point; because if spelling must be corrected on a message board, then why not grammar as well?

I think MadDog does have a point about spelling, however.

The occasional spelling error is OK, but in general an effort should be made to spell correctly. Becusze if no effert is maide at al than it really maks yoor poste look trashi.

The same applies to grammar, some kind of effort should be made.

Names are borderline IMO, on a forum. MadDog is adamant about spelling names correctly, and perhaps most of the time, especially if you are starting a new thread, they should be.

MadDog, MadDog, MadDog!!!

Originally posted by B650:

Originally posted by buck:

Originally posted by fryet:

Originally posted by buck:

Originally posted by MadDog49er:
Only the ding-dongs hate Heitmann (even though he was the best lineman on the team last year), so it not even worthy putting on your review. I'd edit that right out.

You might want to include some of the backups fighting for a spot on the team. How about:
1) Barry Sims- with one M. Possibly the most evil person to put on a Niners jersey since Derek Smith or Kwame Harris. Only a handful of terrible people think he will make the team, including MD. Yikes!! Run for the hills!!

2) Alex Boone- One of the greatest players in the modern NFL. Future starter and ten time Pro-Bowler.

3) Jacob Bender- Would be a much better player if he changed his name to Zeigler or Clayton or Lelie. Unfortunately, he stubbornly insists on keeping his current name.

Cheers.

P.S. I'll be hosting the first annual 49ers Webzone Spelling Bee soon. Some words for the board to work on (we'll start with the tough four letter words first): Sims, Baas. I told you they were tough! We will then increasingly move to MENSA level words: Heitmann, Zeigler.

I promise to not include former 49ers player: Babatunde Oshinowo. However, his roster replacement Chris Francies is fair game.

While you are working on the spelling, you might want to think about taking on the writing skills of our webzoners.

An example (from your post).

Only the ding-dongs hate Heitmann (even though he was the best lineman on the team last year), so it not even worthy putting on your review. I'd edit that right out.

Your use of it is incorrect.

It is a pronoun. Pronouns replace nouns. The noun that a pronoun replaces is called an antecedent. Every pronoun must have an antecedent, and that antecedent must be clearly and immediately understandable.

In your sentence, the pronoun it, which is singular, does not have an antecedent.

If Heitman were the antecedent, the pronoun would be him.

Dingdongs can not be the antecedent. The word "dingdongs" is plural and therefore the proper antecedent would be they, not it.


Furthermore, the pronoun it is the subject of the clause. Every subject must have a verb. The verb that is missing is "be." Be should be either in the present tense (is) or the past tense (was).

As a teacher, and as the self-appointed webzone authority on writing, you really should do much better than this.

Your grade on your post can not be more than a solid D. The skills exhibited just do not match the attitude embedded in your post.

Back to class.

I think the "it" was referring to the controversy that he was expecting to occur. If it was referring to Heitmann than I think it would be "he" not "him". I do agree that a verb is missing.

If you have to think, as in you are not sure, about what the the "it" is referring to, the sentence is not, or was not, written well.

It would be he if the it is the subject of the clause and it would be him if the it were the object in the clause.

Since what Maddog wrote was not comprehensible, it is hard to know for sure, if the it was a subject or the object. But based upon position, I assume that it was a subject.

There are more mistakes in the original post. I did not talk about them because this is a football, not a English composition, forum. But, if necessary I will continue with the lessons in basic English usage.

I do this work for a living. I train teachers how to teach TOEFL, GRE, and GMAT classes. And, to tell the truth my spelling is atrocious.

If you have to think, as in you are not sure, about what the the "it" is referring to, the sentence is not, or was not, written well. This sentence is poorly written and could use parentheses. For example, "the sentence is (or was not)."

It would be he if the it is the subject of the clause and it would be him if the it were the object in the clause.

Since what Maddog wrote was not comprehensible, it is hard to know for sure, if the it was a subject or the object. But based upon position, I assume that it was a subject. Unnecessary comma after "sure."

There are more mistakes in the original post. I did not talk about them because this is a football, not a English composition, forum. But, if necessary I will continue with the lessons in basic English usage. You could do without the "a" before "English." Comma after "composition" is useless. You should have one comma after "necessary."

I do this work for a living. I train teachers how to teach TOEFL, GRE, and GMAT classes. And, to tell the truth my spelling is atrocious. I don't recommend starting a sentence with "And." Comma would be nice after "truth." "You" could be included after "tell". It is possible that you forgot to include it.

You do this for a living? Dude, stick to posting on forums.

Your point is well taken. I will refrain for taking up grammar, but it will difficult.

Wow you guys really know how to hijack a topic.

Nice qb analysis, with Smith out this week hopefully Davis can get even more reps against DAL since we know what we have with Huard.

I want to see more from Davis. Time to make him the 3rd quarterback

Originally posted by tohara3:
I want to see more from Davis. Time to make him the 3rd quarterback

Davis needs to face some better defences in these two games. The point is to develop him slowly, or he faces a Alex Smith situation.