The most idiotic comment I've ever read

[emuen]

So it’s idiotic because he isn’t precise in this language. I thought you meant it was idiotic, because you thought he said the Rams players didn't believe in their own abilities. Guess I misunderstood you.
I hope you can understand that I have a hard time agreeing that the way I read this article is absurd. The difference in approach, as I see it, is that you think of the Rams as 53 players and a coaching staff, while when I read "Rams" I think of a ball club. That means organization, history and fan base. While we can agree that it might be sloppy writing, I don't agree that he claims Rams players don't believe in themselves. And I don't agree its unreasonable to think of Rams as a ball club.

[mh-i]

RR - since you didn't correct mh-i, I will.

Dude - you are NOT old, trust me.

OK. However, Avengerram is a whipper snapper compared to me.

[swatter555]

His words were unambiguous. He said "the Rams thought..." That means the team.

Are you a lawyer?

[AvengerRam]

So it’s idiotic because he isn’t precise in this language. I thought you meant it was idiotic, because you thought he said the Rams players didn't believe in their own abilities. Guess I misunderstood you.

Its idiotic that he pubished that sentence, period.

I hope you can understand that I have a hard time agreeing that the way I read this article is absurd. The difference in approach, as I see it, is that you think of the Rams as 53 players and a coaching staff, while when I read "Rams" I think of a ball club. That means organization, history and fan base.

Reading Clayton's statement as a reference to the fans is absurd.

[AvengerRam]

Are you a lawyer?

Yes. I have been for over 18 years.

[swatter555]

A demand for exact phrasing gives it away everytime. Either that or you would be a college professor.

[MoonJoe]

okay my first reaction when I saw the title of this thread is, "what the heck did i say now!"

Good one LA!

[AlphaRam]

Ok, one second. Take a look at John Clayton.

Enough said, can we close the thread?

Is that Dick Vermeil's brother?

[Guam rammer]

HEHE i can see spags standing on top of a chair addressing his players with his motivational speech before the first game of the season.

Boys!!! we're only gonna win four games this season but if something funny happens and we end up winning six! then hell, that just makes me one inaccurate sun of a gun doesnt it? Now if it looks like we're on our way to a seventh then i'll just have to pull the plug on some of you boys because thats not what we're playing for is it? We win a few, then we lose a bunch, thats Rams football baby. NOW GO OUT THERE AND KICK SOME TAIL.....FOR ONE QUARTER ONLY!!!

[sosa39rams]

HEHE i can see spags standing on top of a chair addressing his players with his motivational speech before the first game of the season.

Boys!!! we're only gonna win four games this season but if something funny happens and we end up winning six! then hell, that just makes me one inaccurate sun of a gun doesnt it? Now if it looks like we're on our way to a seventh then i'll just have to pull the plug on some of you boys because thats not what we're playing for is it? We win a few, then we lose a bunch, thats Rams football baby. NOW GO OUT THERE AND KICK SOME TAIL.....FOR ONE QUARTER ONLY!!!

This was nothing short of brilliant.

[Fargo Ram Fan]

I find it odd that you cant come to grips with the fact that he is writing...FROM HIS (Clayton's) PERSPECTIVE...the Rams thought they were a 4 win team and the Chiefs thought they were a 6 win team. This is clearly HIS PERSPECTIVE on expectations for either club. Do you SERIOUSLY believe this was meant to be taken LITERALLY, as if he lined up each squad and took a freaking poll? Come on now.

I think at the root of this 'outrage', we have yet another case of the blind zealotry all too frequently displayed here. How dare ANYONE speak of the Rams in such a disparaging way!! 4 wins?? Are you DRUNK??

[Bar-bq]

I think at the root of this 'outrage', we have yet another case of the blind zealotry all too frequently displayed here. How dare ANYONE speak of the Rams in such a disparaging way!! 4 wins?? Are you DRUNK??

I love it how we can't have a discussion on this board that doesn't eventually lead to an accusation of zealotry. Here's the skinny:

You have the right to your opinion.

Everybody else has the right to theirs.

There is no Orwellian complex at play. No one opinion carries more weight than any other. Just because AvengerRam says it's true doesn't make it so. And vice versa with newer posters. Rather, the validity of any opinion deserves to be judged on the basis of its prospective merit. Is it justified or supported by substantial evidence or logic?

In this case, I don't think AvengerRam is making a backhanded swipe at the posters who predicted that the Rams would lose substantially more games than they would win this year. I was wholly within that contingent and I don't feel insulted or outraged by the predisposed zeal you have found in the subtext.

In my opinion, he's taking aim at exactly how farcical it is for John Clayton to suggest that that the Rams genuinely believed they were a four win team this season. I don't think anybody within the organisation would openly admit they had a lofty number four circled in black texta above the schedule at Rams Park. Thus, Clayton appears to be talking out of his posterior: regardless of what he thinks, he doesn't have any evidence to suggest that the Rams thought they were a four win team. Perhaps all he needs to include is a personal pronoun:

I thought they were a four-win team that might get a few breaks to get six wins.

For all intents and purposes, that substitution solves any/all problems that arise within this thread. He didn't use the pronoun, and he doesn't have anything to substantiate such a broad claim. He's talking out of his bum and he's getting paid for it. That's all that's at stake here.

Nobody's a zealot.

Those damn pharisees on the other hand...

[Guam rammer]

This was nothing short of brilliant.

Thanks sosa, i was laughing my butt off the whole time i was writing it.

[AvengerRam]

I love it how we can't have a discussion on this board that doesn't eventually lead to an accusation of zealotry. Here's the skinny:

You have the right to your opinion.

Everybody else has the right to theirs.

There is no Orwellian complex at play. No one opinion carries more weight than any other. Just because AvengerRam says it's true doesn't make it so. And vice versa with newer posters. Rather, the validity of any opinion deserves to be judged on the basis of its prospective merit. Is it justified or supported by substantial evidence or logic?

In this case, I don't think AvengerRam is making a backhanded swipe at the posters who predicted that the Rams would lose substantially more games than they would win this year. I was wholly within that contingent and I don't feel insulted or outraged by the predisposed zeal you have found in the subtext.

In my opinion, he's taking aim at exactly how farcical it is for John Clayton to suggest that that the Rams genuinely believed they were a four win team this season. I don't think anybody within the organisation would openly admit they had a lofty number four circled in black texta above the schedule at Rams Park. Thus, Clayton appears to be talking out of his posterior: regardless of what he thinks, he doesn't have any evidence to suggest that the Rams thought they were a four win team. Perhaps all he needs to include is a personal pronoun:



For all intents and purposes, that substitution solves any/all problems that arise within this thread. He didn't use the pronoun, and he doesn't have anything to substantiate such a broad claim. He's talking out of his bum and he's getting paid for it. That's all that's at stake here.

Nobody's a zealot.

Those damn pharisees on the other hand...

Exactly. If Clayton wanted to say that HE saw the Rams that way, it would have been easy to do so.