talking a whole lot without saying anything of remote substance or sources
all too common these days, unfortunately. But, shame on us for voting for it (both literally and with our dollars). We (society) gobble up that nonsense and as long as we continue to do so (and tolerate it) that is what we'll continue to get. You reward stupidity, you get more stupidity. IIWII
Log in or register to post comments about the Virginia Tech Hokies
He talks a lot like a message board "insider". If you spend years on the boards, you know exactly what I'm talking about. Everything he says is very vague, but he says it confidently. That way if something hits, he can go back and say "Yep, that's what I was talking about". If it misses, it was so vague you don't even remember he ever brought the subject up.
Log in or register to post comments about the Virginia Tech Hokies
"If x eventually happens, here is how I will end up talking about it when it does," is PEAK offseason. Just that good, pure, uncut sports radio silliness.
Log in or register to post comments about the Virginia Tech Hokies
Unfortunately I think Pate's rise in popularity has led him to lose some of his independent opinions and veer closer to the corporate / state media talking heads at the big networks.
Log in or register to post comments about the Virginia Tech Hokies
He's one of, if not the, most popular and influential independent college football analysts. He built his following, and his since licensed content to ESPN, Pat McAfee, On3, etc.
He built his following on access - he landed a lot of interviews with folks in the business who rarely give those interviews out. But his interviews are all softball questions (that's why any coach will take an interview with him). He used to talk a lot of ball, but that has kinda gone by the wayside. Now his content is just milquetoast; It's not even that he's not asking hard questions; he's just asking boring ones. And then he comes up with lukewarm takes (like the one linked in OP).
I want to like him because he doesn't have hot takes, he's (mostly) independent, and he seems to appreciate the fan perspective, but I hate the way he masquerades common sense realities as insider information.
Log in or register to post comments about the Virginia Tech Hokies
Comments
Josh Pate is notorious for talking a whole lot without saying anything of remote substance or sources, which is exactly what he just did here.
all too common these days, unfortunately. But, shame on us for voting for it (both literally and with our dollars). We (society) gobble up that nonsense and as long as we continue to do so (and tolerate it) that is what we'll continue to get. You reward stupidity, you get more stupidity. IIWII
o/
He talks a lot like a message board "insider". If you spend years on the boards, you know exactly what I'm talking about. Everything he says is very vague, but he says it confidently. That way if something hits, he can go back and say "Yep, that's what I was talking about". If it misses, it was so vague you don't even remember he ever brought the subject up.
The 'whispers' and 'intel' is that Grunk is probably going to win job, and then there's going to be a late push from the backup?
We ain't paying him to lose the starting job.
"If x eventually happens, here is how I will end up talking about it when it does," is PEAK offseason. Just that good, pure, uncut sports radio silliness.
And that's just one less day they'll have to search hard for something to talk about. Brilliant
Unfortunately I think Pate's rise in popularity has led him to lose some of his independent opinions and veer closer to the corporate / state media talking heads at the big networks.
He SUCKS
I used to follow him on YouTube, but a recent interview he did has caused me to unsubscribe.
I have no idea who this is. Is Josh Pate a name we should know?
Since I dont know him, Im gonna say no.
Yeah, I don't know him either.
The King don't know him. The Beard don't know him. Sounds like a no
He is not discussed around the Tables, so also no.
He's one of, if not the, most popular and influential independent college football analysts. He built his following, and his since licensed content to ESPN, Pat McAfee, On3, etc.
He built his following on access - he landed a lot of interviews with folks in the business who rarely give those interviews out. But his interviews are all softball questions (that's why any coach will take an interview with him). He used to talk a lot of ball, but that has kinda gone by the wayside. Now his content is just milquetoast; It's not even that he's not asking hard questions; he's just asking boring ones. And then he comes up with lukewarm takes (like the one linked in OP).
I want to like him because he doesn't have hot takes, he's (mostly) independent, and he seems to appreciate the fan perspective, but I hate the way he masquerades common sense realities as insider information.
No he's awful. A guy that got access through sucking up then huge promotion through the networks. He's been a bad take machine for the last ~2 years
I'm still waiting on his earth shaking announcement that's going to change everything coming in September 2025...or was that September 2024?
lol the way he made the graphic when talking about the QBs is intentionally misleading.
Grunk is the #220 prospect from the portal and started 7 games last year
Baker is the #35 QB prospect from the portal and the #65 recruit in 2025
The way that is laid out, its almost trying to stir up controversy
Why is this just a link to YouTube with description or commentary by the OP?