no, did not ever say that he wants to lose. go back and read. you're making shit up too. I said he wants to win but via his 1930 philosophy, and GW, passing incompetence notwithstanding, is GS's preferred QB for that .Huh? I'm not back-tracking on anything. You asked a highly ambiguous question. I asked you to clarify.
Also, I never said anybody was either right or wrong about any of the things you just mentioned. That would require me to form a conclusion and there's no evidence to reach such conclusions.
Perhaps you're confusing me with someone else here.
What I did do was make fun of your laughable theory that GS (or any other D1 CFB coach) would rather lose than bring in a better QB because, you said, bringing in a better QB would make the coach look bad.
I mean, I can't state with certainty that your theory is wrong (and so I didn't). Just that it's entertaining and hilarious. But I'm pretty sure that losing games makes coaches look a lot worse to most people than finding and playing a better player for ANY position and winning.
I also did say, using the Zack Wilson comparison, that it's human nature to stick with prior decisions (past is prologue) to prevent comparisons and judgment questions.
Add to that, had there been an offer to the Minn QB I believe he would have accepted just like the Monmouth WR did.
Yet here, somehow absence of committing so far is proof he'll be committing after the bowl ? Absolutely moronic logic. It could happen, but no evidence or logic supports it yet. Instead, my logic (no offer, not committing) is more supported. Doesn't mean accurate, but more logical and more likely to be accurate with what we know.
So, I never did say he wants to lose. I do doubt his interest in a QB change, and thus a real competition.