-Move this thread to the proper place if needed, not sure that it "technically" belongs here-

Accuracy over Grouping

I'm not a genius shooter, algebraic phenom, or world class shooting champ, but I'm noticing a trend here. Site-wide it seems, more of you folks are concerned with a good Group under 1-.5+/- MOA/MIL over Accuracy. I'm not following the reasoning.

I do get that in competition, especially long range, merely hitting the target is equally important as the glass you're using even. For instance, someone will post a thread "Range day with my ________ rifle" and post a picture of the target/targets they shot that day. Nine times out of ten, those bullet holes will be SOMEWHERE else other than the bullseye on the target. I do not understand this concept and method.

IMO, accuracy and grouping go hand-in-hand. If I'm aiming at the bull, and I hit low right, I'm adjusting for that. Not gonna fire off 4 more rounds and say, "Hey, look at my grouping!"
Anytime I shoot, I aim for the bull, every time. Hitting the bull is accuracy, if I do it repeatedly, that's grouping. If I aim 2 inches behind the front shoulder of a buck, I expect my bullet to land there, if not, I'll be at the range trying to figure out why it didn't make a clean kill.

Everyone talks about "tack drivers", yet settle for 5 bullets in a 1/2inch grouping. Make them all touching or one big ragged hole! I wanna see more bullseye, less off in left field playing with grass! Who cares about the group, take out the middle.
There, I said my peace.