Over/Under On The Thompson Bashers

[Harlan Huckleby]

Orton is still in Chicago!?

I say bring back Doug Flutie. He'll look right standing next to the other guys.

[Partial]

yes I remember Merlin saying that and thinking WTF

[3irty1]

I don't recall anyone saying that he reached for either player or fans screaming about those picks.

No you only claimed that he reached for Driver and Tauscher in the 7th. Classic.

Is this some sort of attempt at being smart? I DARE you to find a post where I said this.

I am smart. Harlan told me so. I don't have to "attempt" anything.

Dare accepted:

The Jones pick was a reach but hey so was Driver, Tauscher & Clifton.

Here's the thread if you want to thoroughly remind yourself of your own stupidity, or if you are going to try to claim I took that quote out of context or edited it:

http://www.packerrats.com/ratchat/vi...r=asc&start=20

I don't think he meant to say "reach." You are making it sound like he said TT drafted those guys and that they were bad picks. He's trying to say that just because a player is predicted to be 2nd day by the media doesn't mean that hes not a stud like Driver and the Tackles.

Is it confusing what he said? Yes but you all could have figured out what he meant. Merlin makes a lot of good points so trying to ruin his credibility by bringing up a month old post where he used the wrong word doesn't make sense. Its kind of a weird thing to do too.

[3irty1]

Seriously though I don't understand how everyone can back everything he does or hate everything he does. I'm pretty impartial. I think McCarthy was a fantastic call, besides the 1st round picks the drafts have been good. He doesn't seem to make the big deals like some GMs do but hes still OK.

He hasn't doomed the franchise but to say that he's responsible for the 4-0 start is just taking away from #4. Hes a decent GM whose done some good things and some bad. Right now I'd have to say hes done more good because I have a man-crush on McCarthy.

[Partial]

And then remember when people were shitting bricks around here when he took James Jones "3 rounds too high"??

Seems to me you are thinking about people who worry about late round picks. I worry about #1 and #2. Jennings was a good pick, no arguments here. BUT our #1 picks of Rodgers and Harrell were HORRIBLE.

But so we John Michaels, Ross Verba, Jamal Reynolds, etc. Sometimes people miss on picks. So what? Rodgers has looked great in pre-season. Murphy looked to be decent but he got hurt. Cannot fault TT for that. Harrell hasn't had an opportunity.

It takes a few years to judge a draft choice. Don't you think you're jumping the gun??

[retailguy]

It takes a few years to judge a draft choice. Don't you think you're jumping the gun??

He's absolutely jumping the gun. We can't judge his performance for at least another two years.

But, what about when you predicted he'd be a stud by game one, and you'd be reminding me of that, in not so nice terms as I remember? Was that jumping the gun too? If not, why is it ok for you, but not Merlin? Is it because your view is more optimistic or more "acceptable"? If it is jumping the gun, why does Merlin get criticized and your inaccurate points just get forgotten, or we're playing "dirty pool" if we remind you of them?

Which is it Partial? I'd really like to know since you've appointed yourself the expert on both "forum ettiquette" and the development of Justin Harrell the player.

[MJZiggy]

Thompson has failed in judging the draft choices that would make an immediate impact on the team.

My post was predicated on this statement from your last post. Had nothing to do with any other post you wrote. And I read the whole post. All 3 lines were absurd. He hired McCarthy, but also the majority of players McCarthy coaches.

Once AGAIN.......READ THE ENTIRE POST. Get back to me when you understand the concept of 1st rounders and early 2nd rounders.

Who gives a shit about getting an offensive weapon in the first round when Jones is outplaying all of the first round WR selections anyway? Try looking at the draft as a whole. When your late rounders outperform the high rounders they were drafted with they're good players. It means your GM found good players and seems to have a talent for it.

[Partial]

It takes a few years to judge a draft choice. Don't you think you're jumping the gun??

He's absolutely jumping the gun. We can't judge his performance for at least another two years.

But, what about when you predicted he'd be a stud by game one, and you'd be reminding me of that, in not so nice terms as I remember? Was that jumping the gun too? If not, why is it ok for you, but not Merlin? Is it because your view is more optimistic or more "acceptable"? If it is jumping the gun, why does Merlin get criticized and your inaccurate points just get forgotten, or we're playing "dirty pool" if we remind you of them?

Which is it Partial? I'd really like to know since you've appointed yourself the expert on both "forum ettiquette" and the development of Justin Harrell the player.

I'd like to know where I appointed myself either. Meanwhile, I won't give you a legit response until you respond to my other post.

[retailguy]

It takes a few years to judge a draft choice. Don't you think you're jumping the gun??

He's absolutely jumping the gun. We can't judge his performance for at least another two years.

But, what about when you predicted he'd be a stud by game one, and you'd be reminding me of that, in not so nice terms as I remember? Was that jumping the gun too? If not, why is it ok for you, but not Merlin? Is it because your view is more optimistic or more "acceptable"? If it is jumping the gun, why does Merlin get criticized and your inaccurate points just get forgotten, or we're playing "dirty pool" if we remind you of them?

Which is it Partial? I'd really like to know since you've appointed yourself the expert on both "forum ettiquette" and the development of Justin Harrell the player.

I'd like to know where I appointed myself either. Meanwhile, I won't give you a legit response until you respond to my other post.

which one is that?

[Partial]

You have two examples from above that state they didn't have a problem with what Zach said (Ziggy & Partial). If they had an issue they'd have weighed in. Then someone else would have had an issue to what they said and chimed in too. Then it gets repeated adinfinitum...

If you have an opinion, not shared by the majority of posters/readers/responders, you'll hear about it many, many, many times. The more negative/gloomy/or repeated, the more the responses.

Bitching and moaning gets very, very old after awhile. You have taken the same sarcastic approach that rubs people the wrong way all off-season and now into the season. Everyone makes their own persona here. Whether you're a negativist or a kool-aid drinking SOG(son of a gun) like Nick Collins, you'll hear about it either way.

People get consistently torn down when they keep bitching about the same damn thing and not saying anything constructive at all. Your sarcastic fashion certainly affects posters opinions and it puts that negative spotlight on yourself.

Essentially, you are what you make yourself out to be. You're looked at as a TT hater because thats how your posts come across. Whether thats your intention or not, perception is everything. It's not like you made one snide comment once. You did multiple times a day, day in and day out without acknowledging the good that goes with the bad.

Just to play devil's advocate, by saying it is jumping to conclusions that we're a good team after 4 weeks, it should also be considered jumping to conclusions that letting green walk, the concerns about our running game, etc are all a bit premature this season. After all, we've only played 4 games. Guys that would rather watch football and break it down than bitch about it like myself and I suspect Harv have reason to believe based on what we've seen that we may end up being a pretty solid running team when all is said and done.

^

[retailguy]

Ah, yes. That one.

Well, your good buddy shadow took care of that one for me. Read his post just a few posts after yours where he goes through this example of how I "Just didn't UNDERSTAND him". It was really clear hypocrisy to your point, and didn't require me to respond. It stands alone as a clear example of what I'm talking about.

See, let me sum it up for you. If you post something that the majority disagrees with, you'd better make sure that you do it in a manner that is viewed as "proper" to the rest of the forum. That sums up your post in one sentence, I'd say. If you don't, you've EARNED yourself a bad attitide, and justifiable forum ettiquette from the rest of the posters, such as skin and my good buddy vic who just "pile on".

Next, if your "view" is accepted by the majority of the posters here, it is up the individual reading/responding to that post to "ascertain" what the majority view poster "meant". Failure to do that, subjects said poster to justifiable forum ettiquett from the rest of the posters.

I got it. and I disagree.

You're up.

[SkinBasket]

I don't recall anyone saying that he reached for either player or fans screaming about those picks.

No you only claimed that he reached for Driver and Tauscher in the 7th. Classic.

Is this some sort of attempt at being smart? I DARE you to find a post where I said this.

I am smart. Harlan told me so. I don't have to "attempt" anything.

Dare accepted:

The Jones pick was a reach but hey so was Driver, Tauscher & Clifton.

Here's the thread if you want to thoroughly remind yourself of your own stupidity, or if you are going to try to claim I took that quote out of context or edited it:

http://www.packerrats.com/ratchat/vi...r=asc&start=20

I don't think he meant to say "reach." You are making it sound like he said TT drafted those guys and that they were bad picks. He's trying to say that just because a player is predicted to be 2nd day by the media doesn't mean that hes not a stud like Driver and the Tackles.

Is it confusing what he said? Yes but you all could have figured out what he meant. Merlin makes a lot of good points so trying to ruin his credibility by bringing up a month old post where he used the wrong word doesn't make sense. Its kind of a weird thing to do too.

Well, I'm not sure how much more clearly he could have stated that he believed Driver and Tauscher were reaches. He even compares them to another player he clearly states he believes is a reach. I'm not "making it sound like" he said anything. It's what he said.

As far as Merlin's credibility, he doesn't need me to ruin it. He does an excellent job doing that himself. Yes, the post is a month old. He "DARED" me to find where he had stated that Driver and Tauscher were reaches. So I did it. It wasn't really that hard and it wasn't really so weird.

[son of a vic]

Ah, yes. That one.

Well, your good buddy shadow took care of that one for me. Read his post just a few posts after yours where he goes through this example of how I "Just didn't UNDERSTAND him". It was really clear hypocrisy to your point, and didn't require me to respond. It stands alone as a clear example of what I'm talking about.

See, let me sum it up for you. If you post something that the majority disagrees with, you'd better make sure that you do it in a manner that is viewed as "proper" to the rest of the forum. That sums up your post in one sentence, I'd say. If you don't, you've EARNED yourself a bad attitide, and justifiable forum ettiquette from the rest of the posters, such as skin and my good buddy vic who just "pile on".

Next, if your "view" is accepted by the majority of the posters here, it is up the individual reading/responding to that post to "ascertain" what the majority view poster "meant". Failure to do that, subjects said poster to justifiable forum ettiquett from the rest of the posters.

I got it. and I disagree.

You're up.

You didn't seem to mind coming off the top rope to pile drive my ass into the canvass after I was beaten and bloodied in my daily battle royal with the blind faithful during Sherm's reign.

[SkinBasket]

See, let me sum it up for you. If you post something that the majority disagrees with, you'd better make sure that you do it in a manner that is viewed as "proper" to the rest of the forum. That sums up your post in one sentence, I'd say. If you don't, you've EARNED yourself a bad attitide, and justifiable forum ettiquette from the rest of the posters, such as skin and my good buddy vic who just "pile on".

Since I've been labeled as someone who "piles on," let me respond.

I mentioned this before, but apparently you tend to ignore points that conflict with your views. Someone who posts a MINORITY view is going to have a lot of responses in opposition to that view because they are in the MINORITY, meaning LESS people agree with them than disagree. What you refer to as "piling on" is the MAJORITY (meaning more people than not) responding, and since, by the very definition of the term, there are MORE people in the MAJORITY, there will be MORE responses in opposition to the MINORITY view.

What you seem to be asking for is that people in the MAJORITY on a given topic silence themselves so that the person with the MINORITY view can feel safe or unmolested or still think they're an important person too or whateverthefuck you feel the problem is when someone posts their thoughts and receives feedback that doesn't make them feel like farting rainbows in response.

[retailguy]

You didn't seem to mind coming off the top rope to pile drive my ass into the canvass after I was beaten and bloodied in my daily battle royal with the blind faithful during Sherm's reign.

Two days in a row. Wow. It's my lucky week!

I don't suppose that your criticism of the playcalling, play selection, and the actions of the COACH, DURING THE SEASON might have had anything to do with my responses?

Exactly where, have I criticized the actions of McCarthy during this season? Even ole' Ted for that matter. I've stated I'm worried about the run game, and the health of Al Harris, and something else I can't remember. That seems to be the "majority" accepted viewpoint, even if you love this team, which I do.

Isn't the offseason the proper place for those discussions? Since the season started, I've been largely silent about my viewpoints for those very reasons. Had they been -0-4 I'd have still been silent, which I think the majority, except for Skin, would probably agree with. You should really stick to the Nascar Bookmobile stuff. That was very funny. This is a bit too deep for you, I think. Besides, you're not really interested in "giving a point of view" you are more interested in a satirical attack on anyone who dares challenge your viewpoint, right? I'm undoubtedly the poster boy for that, huh?

Enjoy the wins Vic. I am, and I'm watching curiously to see how long they last.

Check in during week 12 or 13 for my mea culpa if they keep winning. You'll have a field day with that one. I just might even mention you...