Home
Articles
Photos
Interviews
Forums
New posts
Search forums
Georgia Tech Recruiting
Dashboard
What's new
New posts
New profile posts
Latest activity
Chat
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Home
Forums
Georgia Tech Athletics
Georgia Tech Football
Serious Question re: Our "Fullback"
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="stylee" data-source="post: 89319" data-attributes="member: 882"><p>So it is his position behind center that determines that he's quarterback - the "quarterback" term itself is vestigial, but the definition is still dependent on alignment?</p><p>Let's explore this:</p><p> </p><p>X..............LT...LG..C..RG...RT.......................Y</p><p>........A..............................................B............</p><p>..........................Q.......Q.................................</p><p> </p><p> </p><p>This alignment has two QBs, lined up on either side of the center, in the shotgun. Are neither QBs for that play?</p><p>This isn't idle speculation either, it's a formation I've seen used in HS football.</p><p> </p><p>Fundamentally, you don't understand how language actually works. The word "fullback" doesn't mean anything, it's a sign and refers to whatever people actually use it to refer to. Words don't have meanings, people have meanings.</p><p> </p><p>We can (possibly) proactively positively affect our perception by asking announcers to ditch a word with negative connotations vis a vis our offense. You're saying "no, that's ACTUALLY what fullback means, regardless of what anyone says." And your justification is "that's what fullback means in the modern era" - so you tacitly admit to a semantic shift, occurring sometime in the 1940s or 1950s, but don't think there can or should be additional semantic shifts.</p><p> </p><p>In a word, that's absurd.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="stylee, post: 89319, member: 882"] So it is his position behind center that determines that he's quarterback - the "quarterback" term itself is vestigial, but the definition is still dependent on alignment? Let's explore this: X..............LT...LG..C..RG...RT.......................Y ........A..............................................B............ ..........................Q.......Q................................. This alignment has two QBs, lined up on either side of the center, in the shotgun. Are neither QBs for that play? This isn't idle speculation either, it's a formation I've seen used in HS football. Fundamentally, you don't understand how language actually works. The word "fullback" doesn't mean anything, it's a sign and refers to whatever people actually use it to refer to. Words don't have meanings, people have meanings. We can (possibly) proactively positively affect our perception by asking announcers to ditch a word with negative connotations vis a vis our offense. You're saying "no, that's ACTUALLY what fullback means, regardless of what anyone says." And your justification is "that's what fullback means in the modern era" - so you tacitly admit to a semantic shift, occurring sometime in the 1940s or 1950s, but don't think there can or should be additional semantic shifts. In a word, that's absurd. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Who won the ACC Coach of the Year Award in 2014?
Post reply
Home
Forums
Georgia Tech Athletics
Georgia Tech Football
Serious Question re: Our "Fullback"
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top