Mok, you say that I tried to say the quotes weren't about Warner. Incorrect. I never said that these quotes weren't related to Warner. In fact, I said in my fourth response that these quotes were about differences in Bulger from Warner. If you're going to make up my position for me, I'll just not respond and let you argue both sides.
If you can't see that you're intepreting the meaning behind these statements, there's no point trying to debate with you. I can't believe someone would think these quotes are crystal clear and need no interpretation. If you want to see a shot at a player that needs no interpretation, read Terrell Owen's comments on Jeff Garcia. If you want to see a shot at a player that needs no interpretation, read Ray Lewis's reaction to Owens not signing with the Eagles. This is NOT a set of no interpretation quotes, Mok. To think so is ridiculous.
Regarding whether or not Bulger got paid, I didn't answer the other question because I don't know the answer. No article I've read has said whether or not the athletes were paid to appear. I'm tempted to believe they were not, but that's just a guess. If you have any information about whether or not he got paid for his appearance, please provide it. I know of none.
In terms of who opened the door for these comparisons, I believe it would be the press opening the door for comparisons by following up on these kind of stories, not Bulger himself. Or are you telling me the media-shy Bulger sought out reporters so he could talk to them about how much he was different than Kurt?
Regarding reports of Marc being disinterested in fan interaction, what about HUBison's account of him signing every autograph? For someone disinterested in fan interaction, it sures seems like he's doing a pretty good job of interacting with the fans, what with signing autographs after practice and going to offseason events to appear for kids. Perhaps during games, prior or post, he's not interested because he's concentrating on the matter at hand? I mean, we are talking about a guy that's going to work and trying to secure a job here. Maybe, just maybe, he was concentrating on that instead of the fans? He's certainly shown thus far in the offseason that he's receptive to them, and it doesn't sound too out of the question to assume a player may be thinking more about the game during gametime than how he treats the fans.
I never claimed it was a great distance from Pittsburgh to Charleston, but it is a pretty involved trip. Take it from someone who's done it. Over three hours from where I live, which is closer to Charleston than Pittsburgh is. All that should be important is that he made the trip for a fan event. Your insinuations based on this quote that he's not a fan friendly QB is properly challenged by something like this. Just because he didn't go to Iraq doesn't mean this isn't a notable appearance.
But I like how first, the event doesn't count because it's with Randy Moss. Then, the event doesn't count because he lives in West Virginia. Then, the event doesn't count because maybe he doesn't live in WV, but it's not a great distance out of his way. How many more excuses can you make, Mok, to downplay the impact of something like this? Yes, you gave him some commendation for what he's done, and I applaud that. But every step of the way, you've made excuses as to why this shouldn't be considered a big deal or something worth altering your opinion on. Something smells fishy here...
You say I'm a little biased for Bulger, and I agree with that. In another thread, I told Mike that I showed Bulger slight favoritism, but I did not believe that favoritism made me illogical or biased to the point of not being able to criticize him. For the record though, most of the articles I get about Bulger are from various general NFL news sites or are e-mailed to me from the Rampagers list. When I see a thread about Bulger, I look into it and respond, just as I look into other threads and respond. I'm not a part of some Bulger fan club which supplies Bulger-only information on his exploits -- I don't go out of my way to seek out every single bit of information about Bulger, at least not to a greater extent than I do a number of other Rams players -- nor do I have any Bulger memorabilia in my apartment outside the three jerseys I own -- I also own three Warner jerseys and soon three Faulk jerseys. I don't deny that I'm a
Marc Bulger fan, just like I don't deny that I'm a Kurt Warner,
Torry Holt, or Marshall Faulk fan.
What I do deny is that my personal affiliation with the team and players causes an unfair or illogical bias in my opinions. Yes, I'm giving Marc the benefit of the doubt here with these comments because I'm hoping and assuming they weren't meant in ill-will, just as I gave Kurt Warner the benefit of the doubt when his statements about the team and religion were made public (which required much less interpretation, let me add), just as I'm giving
Leonard Little the benefit of the doubt until he's proven guilty, despite most evidence making it seem like his is an open and shut case. If you'd take a look at other outlets for which I talk about the Rams, I'm currently engrossed in a very heated defense of the Rams linebackers on a general NFL discussion page. I can provide you with a link if you'd like to take a look, but the point is Bulger isn't the only Ram I make a point to defend.
The bottom line is I like Bulger just as I like any Ram, and while I may be slightly more interested and supportive of him because of his past affiliation with my college, I don't think that pushes me into a huge bias, certainly not a bias large enough to say that no interpretation is needed to understand what these comments were saying when there clearly is. I'm tempted to defend Bulger partially because of his history, but I won't defend him against things I feel he's clearly at fault for -- I've criticized him for a number of his behaviors this past year, including his deep ball (although I still believe that the running game had an effect on this, a belief that was actually supported by a recent article), his checkdowns, his holding onto the ball too long at times, and specifically the third and final interception in the Carolina contest. These criticisms have all been separate from my defense arguments, meaning I've gone out of my way to make a note of some of his shortcomings in other threads. I guess my point is it's hard for me to believe that I'm overly biased toward Bulger when I make it a point to separately address his negatives and his negatives alone when topics involving criticism appear, rather than just slip in a negative in the middle of a large rant about how great he is. I've made it a point to be both critical and supportive of him, and I stand by a belief that my opinions are generally unbiased on this matter.
Linear Mode
