Welcome to Detroit Sports Forum!

By joining our community, you'll be able to connect with fellow fans that live and breathe Detroit sports just like you!

Get Started
  • If you are no longer able to access your account since our recent switch from vBulletin to XenForo, you may need to reset your password via email. If you no longer have access to the email attached to your account, please fill out our contact form and we will assist you ASAP. Thanks for your continued support of DSF.

Who is Nathan Brink?

Sorry i think i read it from a different viewand yes he did not need to attack personally

Personally i think will has been tossedaround abit

But my original point was tjis was where i heard of brink
 
MAIZEandBLUE09 said:
michlady77 said:
Drew sharp menTioned him in hIs column about recruiting rankings vs reality -he was talking about will campbell

Actually not a bad read

It was actually a bad read - and completely nonfactual. First off, the media only got to see 20 minutes of practice where they were basically doing drills. Things not mentioned in the article:
-Campbell wasn't the only one taken off the 1st strings in these drills
-Brink is competing for multiple positions, it might not even be Campbell's job that he's gunning for.


and lastly I found it completely unprofessional to basically attack a kid like that based on 20 minutes of practice that the media got to saw. For all we know Campbell could be all-big ten this year.


Yay, a free press writer actually took one of his coleagues to task for something!

http://saxo.highschoolsports.net/article/20110822/HSS1201/108220369/Mick-McCabe-Don-t-blame-Cass-Tech-coach-Will-Campbell-s-woes?detroit&Avis=C4

The link doesn't look like freep article, but it is. Of course one of the main points is that Sharp didn't place enough blame on Rodriguez (freep shocker), but I thought the same exact thing when reading the first article.
 
DR said:
MAIZEandBLUE09 said:
It was actually a bad read - and completely nonfactual. First off, the media only got to see 20 minutes of practice where they were basically doing drills. Things not mentioned in the article:
-Campbell wasn't the only one taken off the 1st strings in these drills
-Brink is competing for multiple positions, it might not even be Campbell's job that he's gunning for.


and lastly I found it completely unprofessional to basically attack a kid like that based on 20 minutes of practice that the media got to saw. For all we know Campbell could be all-big ten this year.


Yay, a free press writer actually took one of his coleagues to task for something!

http://saxo.highschoolsports.net/article/20110822/HSS1201/108220369/Mick-McCabe-Don-t-blame-Cass-Tech-coach-Will-Campbell-s-woes?detroit&Avis=C4

The link doesn't look like freep article, but it is. Of course one of the main points is that Sharp didn't place enough blame on Rodriguez (freep shocker), but I thought the same exact thing when reading the first article.

BTW I just re-read what I wrote and want to apologize for using the phrase (got to saw) lol. That's awful grammar and it hurt me a little to re-read.
 
Yeah, I noticed that the first time. I think I deserve some karma for not commenting on it!
 
MAIZEandBLUE09 said:
DR said:
Yay, a free press writer actually took one of his coleagues to task for something!

http://saxo.highschoolsports.net/article/20110822/HSS1201/108220369/Mick-McCabe-Don-t-blame-Cass-Tech-coach-Will-Campbell-s-woes?detroit&Avis=C4

The link doesn't look like freep article, but it is. Of course one of the main points is that Sharp didn't place enough blame on Rodriguez (freep shocker), but I thought the same exact thing when reading the first article.

BTW I just re-read what I wrote and want to apologize for using the phrase (got to saw) lol. That's awful grammar and it hurt me a little to re-read.

It hurt me a LOT to read. :'( You could go back and edit, you know. ;)

Addendum: At least they didn't "seen it."
 
GoBlueInAtlanta said:
MAIZEandBLUE09 said:
BTW I just re-read what I wrote and want to apologize for using the phrase (got to saw) lol. That's awful grammar and it hurt me a little to re-read.

It hurt me a LOT to read. :'( You could go back and edit, you know. ;)

Addendum: At least they didn't "seen it."

'seent' is the past tense of see
 
Back
Top