no wonder we hired Hunter Lochmann
Gulo Gulo Luscus
- Member for
- 5 years 22 weeks
- View recent blog entries
|3 days 1 hour ago||Dortmund||
This is the worst. Those jerks already poached Lewandowski and Gotze. Reus may be next.
|6 days 4 hours ago||
Not like no one's ever lied on Twitter, but I'd think the $8 million he stands to earn at Kentucky versus the $5 million the Pels are looking to shell out might be a deal breaker (per the NOLA.com article you linked to).
|6 days 4 hours ago||good vibes||
Sending positive vibes your way, rockydude.
|1 week 6 days ago||Stake boarding?Steak||
I thought the joke was about roller blading anyway...
|2 weeks 2 days ago||no votes?||
Is it just me or is upvote/downvote disabled for this post and the comments? Is that normal for WTKA posts?
|2 weeks 4 days ago||Izzo for Cuonzo? He's a bozo||
Izzo for Cuonzo? Must be a Bozo according to Sparty.
Now I want some chorizo orzo.
|2 weeks 4 days ago||Indeed||
I'm a bit too MGrowYoung to have recognized the name, but indeed that was his inspiration. Any other netminders you know of from back in the day who customized the mask like that? Is Cheevers the original?
|2 weeks 4 days ago||masks||
I don't think he was the first to get creative with the mask, but I'll always remember him for it.
|2 weeks 5 days ago||tedd cruz||
tedd cruz. the extra "d" is for douchebag
|2 weeks 6 days ago||proves the point||
just what a savvy savior savant should say
|2 weeks 6 days ago||two||
this comment has two bottom lines, which is impossible.
|2 weeks 6 days ago||the bigger picture wasn't||
the bigger picture wasn't lost on me, i just find it disingenuous to suggest the issue is merely the "cursory job." if they did a comprehensive job and drafted him anyway, there would still be potential for PR disaster because you're not taking the issues seriously enough.
so how does an NFL GM give appropriate attention to domestic violence in this situation? merely a hypothetical, but i think it's the real question. ace already answered for me in spades below.
|2 weeks 6 days ago||that's an interesting||
that's an interesting comparison on non-violent legal issues relative to damaged draft stock. would make for an interesting "how bad does the NFL think crime [x} is?" metric.
but i think with these specfiic examples, it's more a factor of DGB/shane ray being higher profile/first-round caliber players. what percentage of seahawks fans do you think knew about frank's past at the time he was drafted?
i do agree that the seahawks "we don't think it happened" is an affront to everyone involved. i just think it should have been clear this post would stir up a conversation about domestic violence and frank's issue in particular more than make us wonder why NFL GMs are dishonest. even if that very dishonesty is a huge part of a bigger problem: cash rules everything around me.
|2 weeks 6 days ago||i appreciate the reply, ace.||
i appreciate the reply, ace. i was being a bit snarky and think your notion that seattled failed all involved is accurate. but i would have liked to read that second paragraph in the article itself, because it felt like you were walking the line on the issue of judging frank's behavior.
i was also doing a bit of projecting to the end point of my own chain of thoughts after reading it. if one believes frank clark did what these witnesses suggest, one wouldn't be entirely out of line in choosing not to be the organization paying him millions of dollars just because he's sure to be *this much* better than the next guy on your draft board. someone taking a stand like that would go a long way.
|2 weeks 6 days ago||incompetence?||
you're being far too generous by calling it "incompetent." they aren't saying "nah, I'm good" because they are idiots, but because they are calculating. it's bad PR no matter what when you draft someone with a criminal history, but pleading ignorance is easier than telling the truth.
|2 weeks 6 days ago||i appreciate the ability to||
i appreciate the ability to point things out that are overlooked. there's value in that and ace is entirely right to say the seahawks aren't doing anyone any favors by claiming they did anything but valued perceived talent over perceived character.
but i think the whole "seahawks didn't CARE" angle is not what anyone's upset about. that's a pretty thin veil. if you think that frank clark doesn't deserve to get drafted based on all available information then just say it.
to be honest, i wouldn't disagree entirely. it would be a huge step for a team to outwardly state "we have reviewed all information about his activities and behavior to date and will not draft [insert player here]." it's not unrealistic in other industries and would be a seismic shift if you buy into the athletes as role models narrative.
|2 weeks 6 days ago||that's really not the issue,||
that's really not the issue, though. that's the context in which ace is talking about the much larger issue of domestic violence and football's ongoing image issue. a team that says "we did the full investigation and drafted him anyway" or "we didn't really investigate that" isn't going to get a great response for telling the truth.
the "bombshell article" from the seattle times should be titled "newsflash: nfl draft pick has checkered legal past, is drafted anyway"
|2 weeks 6 days ago||i feel like this piece was||
i feel like this piece was ready before the draft. if not, it certainly could have been. any GM was going to say what schneider did. a team that had actually done the investigation and spoken to the witnesses would have "failed everyone" by drafting him even moreso.
i'm afraid, whether cleverly or cowardly, ace has said it without saying it: frank clark doesn't deserve to be in the NFL.
|2 weeks 6 days ago||true||
true, but they weren't exactly immune to hateful stereotyping either. not suggesting equivalency, just playing the "not sure if you know this" game:
|4 weeks 5 hours ago||(No subject)||
|4 weeks 3 days ago||does it make a sound?||
If all the (nt)OSU fans in the world shrug at once, does it make a sound?
Seriously, though, I'm with you. Screw the NCAA.
|4 weeks 3 days ago||To be clear though, I||
Breathe easy, then. Per Seth's definition, you are not an asshole. At least not for anything in this comment, although I can't say for sure what you're like otherwise.
|4 weeks 3 days ago||weird||
I feel like there was just a front page post about this very topic...
|4 weeks 3 days ago||God of Trolls||
Something like this?
|4 weeks 3 days ago||Someone who wrote a letter of||
Someone who wrote a letter of intent to attend at age 10 and then incurred massive debt isn't [inherently] slightly higher on the "fandom" rankings than someone who turns on a TV every Saturday.
Sorry, had to tell you. Be proud of your hard work academically, but that has nothing to do with sports fandom.
|4 weeks 3 days ago||From those "feely" threads, I||
From those "feely" threads, I would add another definition:
"If you are an alum who thinks attending your university (say... UM-Ann Arbor) distinguishes you as a better person than those who attended another (I dunno... maybe UM-Flint/Dearborn), you are a douche."
Unless of course the person you think you're better than is an alum of OSU/MSU/ND. In that case, they're the douche! Unless they an alum of UM as well, in which case...
|4 weeks 6 days ago||it'll go 8 eventually||
we're headed for 8 (or more), but i will pull from the archives and agree with MGoUser CRex, who looked back on the BCS era to assess how many teams could make a claim to the tital following a given regular season. in january 2012 he concluded:
Whatever happened to CRex?
|5 weeks 17 min ago||in the real one, i guess||
in the same world where in spite of those penalties OSU gets one of the best coaches on the market immediately and wins another championship within a few years? i'll grant that may be a factor of OSU weathering the storm much better, but historically speaking there wasn't much "suffering" when you look at what followed compared to the fallout at M in the wake of fab 5.
my point is you can't ignore the time frame between the improper actions and the honoring of the guilty party. that's actually the crux of my argument against your claim that 30 for 30 is somehow equivalent. and that's the only part of your comment i took issue with in the first place. there's no comparison between parading Tressel around (which you admit was in bad taste) and enjoying a documentary two decades later.
as an institution, M disassociated from the fab 5 and even now some fans would rather not have them (or a pair of final 4 banners) around Crisler. compare that to how OSU (both institutionally and from fan perspective) handled Tressel. doesn't mean OSU is any dirtier, but it's a starkly different response.
|5 weeks 5 hours ago||Eww...|
|5 weeks 5 hours ago||20 years later||
I'm happy to acknowledge an unreasonable holier-than-thou attitude among a certain section of the M fan base, but there are some stark differences here. Assuming we're all ready to give kids the benefit of the doubt and focus on responsible adults...
A) M fans hold the mistakes against Fisher in spite of his success; Tress is near universally glorified as a martyr
B) if enjoying 30 for 30 is your measure, M fans waited 20 years to celebrate the successes experienced under Fisher; Tress was carried off on the shoulders of fans within a calendar year
C) M paid dearly for its crimes; OSU was similarly guilty and suffered very little (regardless of the fairness of punishment in either case, it explains why some get pretty indignant on this topic)