Depth Chart released

dhbartlett12

dhbartlett12

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
533
AlabamaBuzz said:
No offense taken. I am very attune to grammatical mistakes, and this is one I was unaware of. (really more just a wrong use of a phrase/word) Let me correct this...

I am very concerned about Andrews not being shown on the 2-deep.
Click to expand...

A quite peek at the dictionary says "concerning" is an adjective meaning worrying. So you definitely have an uphill battle here.
 
AlabamaBuzz

AlabamaBuzz

Helluva Engineer
Messages
4,017
Location
Hartselle, AL (originally Rome, GA)
dhbartlett12 said:
A quite peek at the dictionary says "concerning" is an adjective meaning worrying. So you definitely have an uphill battle here.
Click to expand...

A "quite" peek? Anyway, I don't have an uphill battle, because I wasn't the one who brought it up. I made the statement "This is very concerning", so it sounds like I could have said "This is very worrying", and it still sounds o.k. to me.
 
Northeast Stinger

Northeast Stinger

Helluva Engineer
Messages
10,711
AlabamaBuzz said:
A "quite" peek? Anyway, I don't have an uphill battle, because I wasn't the one who brought it up. I made the statement "This is very concerning", so it sounds like I could have said "This is very worrying", and it still sounds o.k. to me.
Click to expand...
Yes. You would have several options. This is a concern, this is worrying, this is troubling and maybe even this is disconcerting. Standard dictionaries define the word "concerning" as meaning relating to or with regard to. But I freely admit there is no longer such a thing as standard English. Whatever people use is considered standard. Though I suspect if one were writing a dissertation for a degree in English the professor would be concerned concerning this usage. :)

Final note. This was not to call anyone out; it was to raise a question about how and why this use of the word suddenly became so popular in the last few years. It reminds me of talking heads who all of a sudden started using phrases like, "Going forward" and "At the end of the day" and "At this point in time." One rarely if ever heard these phrases a few years ago and now it is difficult to not hear these phrases. Likewise lots of people use the word forte now but no one who means it in terms of "a strong suit" pronounces it correctly.

Why do I obsess about this stuff? Probably a border line mental illness. But a thread like this sometimes gives me "on the ground" data to understand why people say what they say.
 
DaddyBill

DaddyBill

Jolly Good Fellow
Messages
340
Location
Hahira, GA (It's near Valdosta)
I would say concerned would mean worried thus concerning would be worrisome. But in another context concerning means in regards to. As. I am writing this note concerning the use of concerning. Of course it was 48 years ago when I was awarded the B.A. in English and might have learned old school values.. At this point in time and going forward I shalt no longer be a grammar cop so y'all just say what you want to. (yes, I did ended the sentence with a preposition. So what? It's no concern of mine.
 
AE 87

AE 87

Helluva Engineer
Messages
13,024
Northeast Stinger said:
Yes. You would have several options. This is a concern, this is worrying, this is troubling and maybe even this is disconcerting. Standard dictionaries define the word "concerning" as meaning relating to or with regard to. But I freely admit there is no longer such a thing as standard English. Whatever people use is considered standard. Though I suspect if one were writing a dissertation for a degree in English the professor would be concerned concerning this usage. :)

Final note. This was not to call anyone out; it was to raise a question about how and why this use of the word suddenly became so popular in the last few years. It reminds me of talking heads who all of a sudden started using phrases like, "Going forward" and "At the end of the day" and "At this point in time." One rarely if ever heard these phrases a few years ago and now it is difficult to not hear these phrases. Likewise lots of people use the word forte now but no one who means it in terms of "a strong suit" pronounces it correctly.

Why do I obsess about this stuff? Probably a border line mental illness. But a thread like this sometimes gives me "on the ground" data to understand why people say what they say.
Click to expand...

So, you find the adjectival use concerning?
 
dhbartlett12

dhbartlett12

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
533
Northeast Stinger said:
Yes. You would have several options. This is a concern, this is worrying, this is troubling and maybe even this is disconcerting. Standard dictionaries define the word "concerning" as meaning relating to or with regard to. But I freely admit there is no longer such a thing as standard English. Whatever people use is considered standard. Though I suspect if one were writing a dissertation for a degree in English the professor would be concerned concerning this usage. :)

Final note. This was not to call anyone out; it was to raise a question about how and why this use of the word suddenly became so popular in the last few years. It reminds me of talking heads who all of a sudden started using phrases like, "Going forward" and "At the end of the day" and "At this point in time." One rarely if ever heard these phrases a few years ago and now it is difficult to not hear these phrases. Likewise lots of people use the word forte now but no one who means it in terms of "a strong suit" pronounces it correctly.

Why do I obsess about this stuff? Probably a border line mental illness. But a thread like this sometimes gives me "on the ground" data to understand why people say what they say.
Click to expand...

You are this guy aren't you? http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Talk:concerning
 
forensicbuzz

forensicbuzz

21st Century Throwback Dad
Messages
8,803
Location
North Shore, Chicago
Dottie1145 said:
Idiot
Click to expand...
I think Brad has as good a chance as any freshman to push the 1 or 2 spot. Wide receiver is a position where there's not really anything on the depth chart past the 2's and one of those 2's is a true freshman/early enrollee. One injury to a WR, and a summer-arrival true freshman has a great chance to get on the depth chart. (maybe the idiot response was for the duh?)
 
Dottie1145

Dottie1145

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,212
forensicbuzz said:
I think Brad has as good a chance as any freshman to push the 1 or 2 spot. Wide receiver is a position where there's not really anything on the depth chart past the 2's and one of those 2's is a true freshman/early enrollee. One injury to a WR, and a summer-arrival true freshman has a great chance to get on the depth chart. (maybe the idiot response was for the duh?)
Click to expand...
Yes I was a big supporter of Stewart and defended him and got kicked from posting on his thread for it. He was being a smart ***.
 
forensicbuzz

forensicbuzz

21st Century Throwback Dad
Messages
8,803
Location
North Shore, Chicago
AE 87 said:
I hear you, but we just signed 25. We'll need some to play to balance out the classes.
Click to expand...
Do you think those that can't break the 2-deep get some ST time to help even out the classes? WR and AB are the two most-likely positions for FR to see the field based on depth. Maybe Alexander at LB? Maybe one of the DTs? Maybe Saint-Amour? Our ST is usually LB's, DB's and young DE's, but usually true FR don't see ST unless they're in the 2-deep. Might see some exceptions this year.
 
AE 87

AE 87

Helluva Engineer
Messages
13,024
forensicbuzz said:
Do you think those that can't break the 2-deep get some ST time to help even out the classes? WR and AB are the two most-likely positions for FR to see the field based on depth. Maybe Alexander at LB? Maybe one of the DTs? Maybe Saint-Amour? Our ST is usually LB's, DB's and young DE's, but usually true FR don't see ST unless they're in the 2-deep. Might see some exceptions this year.
Click to expand...

I think we'll see 3-4 on O, rbs & wrs, and 3-4 on D, maybe Kyle and then safeties lbs for special teams.
 

danny daniel

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,612
forensicbuzz said:
Do you think those that can't break the 2-deep get some ST time to help even out the classes? WR and AB are the two most-likely positions for FR to see the field based on depth. Maybe Alexander at LB? Maybe one of the DTs? Maybe Saint-Amour? Our ST is usually LB's, DB's and young DE's, but usually true FR don't see ST unless they're in the 2-deep. Might see some exceptions this year.
Click to expand...

Lewis and Kagawa were exceptions on STs last year and maybe the Austins and Step as well. IMO several true freshmen will play STs this year and not be in the 2 deep.
 
Top