- Member for
- 3 years 13 weeks
- View recent blog entries
|1 week 3 days ago||Yeah, I re-read yours after I||
Yeah, I re-read yours after I posted and was worried for a minute that I lost the ability to read. I completely agree with your comment with the new wording.
|1 week 3 days ago||"But you've lost the ability||
"But you've lost the ability to denounce any player for anything they do off the field."
My reading of this is that Brian is denouncing Clark's actions as despicable, but is pausing to consider the circumstances / context and basically saying, "Walk a mile in Clark's shoes before you judge." You can look at the situation as a whole - denounce a player's terrible actions and still hope they learn from it and improve their life.
I'm not sure what exactly your point is here? What is wrong with that? Maybe we should never denounce a college football player for their actions off the field without context?
|1 week 3 days ago||Great writeup, Brian.||
Great writeup, Brian.
|4 weeks 1 day ago||I think you accidentally a||
I think you accidentally a word.
|4 weeks 2 days ago||http://i61.tinypic.com/wmjww7||
|4 weeks 2 days ago||Welcome back, WD! Maybe||
Welcome back, WD! Maybe Bando will apologize to you now.
|7 weeks 22 hours ago||This is hilarious. Remember||
This is hilarious. Remember when Haegerup biffed the snap in the OSU game a couple years ago? He went to the sidelines and Hoke calmly encouraged him and gave him a pat on the back. At the time, everyone thought it was great coaching and pointed out how people like RR or Kelly would have screamed at him in rage, and how this was much better to encourage the player.
And here we are, two years later - Hoke still has the same style, but now everyone is jumping on the guy for that encouraging style. The same encouraging style that he has had his entire tenure here, the same encouraging style that we (collectively) used to laud.
Don't get me wrong, I think Hoke needs to go and this is not a defense of him. But this is ridiculous.
|8 weeks 20 hours ago||OT: "through a ringer"||
I know what that phrase means, but I've often wondered where it came from. Reading this prompted me to look it up. I'm not trying to be "that guy" but I just discovered that it is actually "through a/the wringer". A wringer is a machine used to press out liquid or moisture from clothes. I'm not sure if you already knew this or not, but I thought it was interesting.
I'm sure most people could not care less about this, so I will now see myself out.
|8 weeks 5 days ago||(No subject)||
|9 weeks 19 hours ago||You forgot that he also||
You forgot that he also downvotes nearly every single thread, especially if it involves Detroit sports.
|9 weeks 21 hours ago||"likely to get a response"||
"I don’t see a problem with that as publically calling out your employer is likely going to generate a response."
Yes, it sure did generate a response.
Simmons basically dared them to do something. Calling out your employer publicly and daring them to discipline you does not seem like it is a smart thing to do if you like having your job.
Also, ESPN is typically very conservative about these kinds of things, and this suspension fits in with their previous actions. This is at least the third time Simmons has been suspended. He likes to toe the line.
|9 weeks 1 day ago||Beat Minnesota Discontent||
Discontent will still bubble
|9 weeks 6 days ago||Yeah, that is a very valid||
Yeah, that is a very valid part of your post, which is why I did not critique that line in my response.
I mainly responded to highlight your negative slant towards Michigan. I typically enjoy your posts and find them very knowledgable, however they often lean towards being anti-Michigan, and it almost seems like you enjoy being negative about Michigan.
|9 weeks 6 days ago||"The 5-7 thing is not worth mentioning"||
You can make the same argument about us - Michigan went 7-5 last year with a lot of close losses against good teams. Most would agree that Michigan was not a good team just because of some moral victories, yet you seem eager to use the same reasoning to give Utah the benefit of the doubt everywhere. What's the difference? Natural Michigan pessimism?
|10 weeks 3 days ago||That is an interesting||
That is an interesting perspective and certainly true for some people who did choose to become Michigan fans. However, it doesn't account for people who were born into families of Michigan fans and had no choice. I am not Michigan alum, yet one of my earliest memories is Rumeal Robinson sinking two FTs vs Seton Hall. That same year (I think) my parents let me stay up late to watch the Pistons close out the Trailblazers. I also vaguely remember my dad throwing a pillow at the TV when Webber called that timeout and then cussing him out. (The next day he told me he was sorry for yelling at Webber, and you should never yell at the players, haha.)
So I'm not an alum, but I also certainly did not choose to be a Michigan fan - the same way I did not choose to be a Pistons, Lions, Tigers, Wings fan. I wasn't exactly brainwashed, but it was inevitable the way I was brought up, and there was never a conscious choice.
|11 weeks 37 min ago||M 49 - Miami (NTM) 0||
M 49 - Miami (NTM) 0
|11 weeks 3 days ago||"Fair" is subjective, but a||
"Fair" is subjective, but a year suspension and a chance for reinstatement after demonstrating good behavior (say he goes to counseling, starts a foundation against domestic violence, something along those lines) seems pretty fair to me.
|11 weeks 3 days ago||No worries, reading it again,||
No worries, reading it again, I was not clear enough that I still think he needs to pay his debt to society (just as Michael Vick did, or any criminal even if they aren't in the NFL) prior to earning his second chance.
|11 weeks 3 days ago||I totally agree that he||
I totally agree that he should be punished. He should be in prison. Doesn't mean I want him to fail at life for the rest of his years, as many on here apparently hope for.
|11 weeks 3 days ago||If you want to write him off||
If you want to write him off for the rest of his life, that's on you. I just see all these people basically wishing the worst upon this guy, and I thought I'd give a different perspective.
If you ever have a serious error in judgment, I hope people are more willing to give you a second chance than you seem to be.
|11 weeks 3 days ago||Wow, so much vindictive||
Wow, so much vindictive anger, hatred, and negativity in this thread - it fits right in with the rest of the board the past couple days!
From reading this thread, apparently criminals can never change, don't deserve second chances, and lose their right to be employed.
I personally hope that Ray Rice and his now-wife are living happily and peacefully together. I hope Rice has truly learned from this, is a changed man, and never strikes a woman again in his life. I hope he becomes a better person by learning from the terrible mistake he made that night. I hope that he demonstrates to everyone the change in his life and earns a second chance to provide for his family.
|11 weeks 6 days ago||Wow, this is such an||
Wow, this is such an incredibly awesome idea. On the one hand, I hope you are serious because this would be amazing. On the other hand, I don't even know you, but I would still be concerned for your safety. As others have said, if this actually goes down, please take lots of pics.
|12 weeks 1 day ago||M 48 - ND 23||
M 48 - ND 23
|12 weeks 5 days ago||On the draw play, I think||
On the draw play, I think Gardner checked into it, so we don't necessarily know what the coaches called there.
|12 weeks 5 days ago||I believe it is illegal to||
I believe it is illegal to jump over the mini-wall right in front of the punter. Not 100% sure, can anyone else confirm?
|13 weeks 2 days ago||Great story, you had me||
Great story, you had me laughing out loud at work, alone in my office. The second read through also got me.
|13 weeks 2 days ago||I know nothing.||
I know nothing. =(
|13 weeks 3 days ago||Saw the header of the||
Saw the headline pic of the article, thought Resph1 was now writing the previews.
|17 weeks 1 day ago||I'm not condoning the choice||
I'm not condoning the choice to mock anyone, and I actually completely agree with your philosophy.
But even so, it seems ridiculous to me that making a joke about someone would result in the joke maker having to pay the subject of his joke...even if it was a bad joke, made in bad taste. And again, only if the joke maker happens to be rich.
|17 weeks 1 day ago||Because every time you mock||
Because every time you mock someone, you should definitely have to pay them. But only if you're rich.