Those for JGarrett in 2013

[alsmith]

D A post,

[stasheroo]

Originally Posted by a_minimalist

Sorry but arguing for the sake of arguing isn't an intelligent and spirited debate. It's arguing and wasting precious time, that's it.

Sorry you choose to see things that way.

[jterrell]

Originally Posted by stasheroo

Probably right about that.

But to me it's often used by the guy who has run out of ideas and anything constructive to say. They then hit the smilie 'panic button' and hope that nobody notices that they're in over their heads.



A 'good leader' doesn't mean anything without tangible results either. All the 'intangibles' in the world are meaningless unless they contribute to tangible results.

I have never heard the words 'intangibles' used more often on any player than Tim Tebow. How are all of those intangibles working out for him and the Jets? Ultimately, it's about results. Everything else is just noise.



Agree or disagree, I enjoy intelliegent, spirited debate.

You and I have agreed and disagreed many times, but you always put great efforts into supporting whatever side of the argument you come down on.

I appreciate that.

Only going to disagree about the intangible part.

If you are a good leader, you are a good leader. It doesn't mean everything turns to sunshine around you. While you can often see some tangible evidence it is often of questionable causality. That's why it is an intangible in the first place.

Players who practice hard perform better. A pretty basic idiom but hard to truly validate with evidence over time. And in fact in some cases players may play better without any practice at all but just rest. Lots of variables but a very solid idiom overall.

Tim Tebow's intangibles seemed to work wonders in Florida. But his overall lack of use and the fact he is splitting a fan base could cause a guy with positive intangibles to have a negative impact when in the wrong situation.

Emmitt had great intangibles here until we were sorry and he was calling his teammates poo.

I get drawn offsides into extremes as well. It is a lazier way to debate and requires less thought or work. So it happens to all of us and becomes the norm on the forums. I am going to try and be a value add by steering things back toward the middle where possible.

[stasheroo]

Originally Posted by a_minimalist

So that's what intangible means. Thanks!

No problem. seems obvious you needed the help.

Just curious, since we are talking about players and not the team here, what facts are you referring to, since you only deal in that which is tangible.

Actually, we're talking about coaches here - specifically Jason Garrett.

No no, I'm just laughing at you. They're pretty straightforward.

What's more straightforward is that you've got nothing constructive to add to the conversation and are in over your head.

Let the adults talk and quit embarrassing yourself any further.

You got me. This is such an "intelligent" debate.

If you don't think so, don't post here. Plenty of more topics worthy of you and your obvious insights..

[stasheroo]

Originally Posted by jterrell

Only going to disagree about the intangible part.

If you are a good leader, you are a good leader. It doesn't mean everything turns to sunshine around you. While you can often see some tangible evidence it is often of questionable causality. That's why it is an intangible in the first place.

Players who practice hard perform better. A pretty basic idiom but hard to truly validate with evidence over time. And in fact in some cases players may play better without any practice at all but just rest. Lots of variables but a very solid idiom overall.

And I go back to this being a results business. For me, you can have any and all of the rest of it, at the end of the day it's about doing it, not saying it.

Two years into 'the process' and I can't tangible evidence (there it is again!) where any of what's being said is actually causing improvement and by extension - wins.

It's reached the point where it's just noise for me. Noise, from the owner/GM, noise from the coaches, and noise from the players trying to say the right things.

Tim Tebow's intangibles seemed to work wonders in Florida. But his overall lack of use and the fact he is splitting a fan base could cause a guy with positive intangibles to have a negative impact when in the wrong situation.

Emmitt had great intangibles here until we were sorry and he was calling his teammates poo.

I get drawn offsides into extremes as well. It is a lazier way to debate and requires less thought or work. So it happens to all of us and becomes the norm on the forums. I am going to try and be a value add by steering things back toward the middle where possible.

I'll cop to letting my passions get the best of me sometimes and I do work to maintain a more even stance, but not without substantial effort.

Good luck in your efforts!

[Idgit]

Originally Posted by stasheroo

And I go back to this being a results business. For me, you can have any and all of the rest of it, at the end of the day it's about doing it, not saying it.

Two years into 'the process' and I can't tangible evidence (there it is again!) where any of what's being said is actually causing improvement and by extension - wins.

It's reached the point where it's just noise for me. Noise, from the owner/GM, noise from the coaches, and noise from the players trying to say the right things...

Here's a hypothetical for you, and I know hypotheticals have limitations. What would you be saying about tangible evidence if you were a Saints fan at the end of Sean Payton's third season in New Orleans?

[a_minimalist]

Originally Posted by stasheroo

Actually, we're talking about coaches here - specifically Jason Garrett.

Wait, I thought this was supposed to be an "intelligent" debate. You can't even follow along. We weren't talking about Jason Garrett. We were talking about the quality of players that have been brought in compared to the quality of players now. You said the facts state the opposite. I'm asking what player facts state this?

I hate to say it but you're not making this look like a very intelligent debate.

What's more straightforward is that you've got nothing constructive to add to the conversation and are in over your head.

Actually, what I said was quite constructive. I mean maybe it was too much for you to handle which is why of all that was said you only focused on the two little smiles at the end. I don't know though.

Let the adults talk and quit embarrassing yourself any further.

Again, and we're the dreamers.

[17yearsandcounting]

Originally Posted by Idgit

Here's a hypothetical for you, and I know hypotheticals have limitations. What would you be saying about tangible evidence if you were a Saints fan at the end of Sean Payton's third season in New Orleans?

An NFC CHAMPIONSHIP GAME APPEARANCE?

[stasheroo]

Originally Posted by Idgit

Here's a hypothetical for you, and I know hypotheticals have limitations. What would you be saying about tangible evidence if you were a Saints fan at the end of Sean Payton's third season in New Orleans?

While I would not have been happy with his 8-8 record, I would have felt very good about the tremendous offense that my offensive-minded coach had built.

I would hope that he could put together a capable defense to compliemtn that offense.

He may not have had a great overall record, but he did have his offense working well.

[17yearsandcounting]

Originally Posted by stasheroo

While I would not have been happy with his 8-8 record, I would have felt very good about the tremendous offense that my offensive-minded coach had built.

I would hope that he could put together a capable defense to compliemtn that offense.

He may not have had a great overall record, but he did have his offense working well.

He was still 25-23, a division, a first round bye, a playoff win, and an NFC Championship game appearance.

Get crackin ginger!

[stasheroo]

Originally Posted by a_minimalist

Wait, I thought this was supposed to be an "intelligent" debate. You can't even follow along. We weren't talking about Jason Garrett. We were talking about the quality of players that have been brought in compared to the quality of players now. You said the facts state the opposite. I'm asking what player facts state this?

I hate to say it but you're not making this look like a very intelligent debate.

The 'facts' that show that this team has not improved in any measureable way. 8-8 last season, 5-6 this season. And an offense getting worse not better. That's all the 'facts' that anyone needs.

Conversely, what you have brought? Hopes and dreams? Wishful thinking? 'If's' and 'but's'?

Hard to have a debate when one side brings nothing to it.

Actually, what I said was quite constructive. I mean maybe it was too much for you to handle which is why of all that was said you only focused on the two little smiles at the end. I don't know though.



Again, and we're the dreamers.

Obviously.

8-8 and 5-6 say so irrefutably.

Once again, I bring tangible evidence and you bring - nothing.

[stasheroo]

Originally Posted by 17yearsandcounting

He was still 25-23, a division, a first round bye, a playoff win, and an NFC Championship game appearance.

Get crackin ginger!

Very good point.

By that time, he did have the built up, tangible equity of having had success.

Unlike other guys...

[a_minimalist]

Originally Posted by stasheroo

Hard to have a debate when one side brings nothing to it.

I've brought plenty and laid it out for you as well. You just ignore it and I'm not repeating myself.

[stasheroo]

Originally Posted by a_minimalist

I've brought plenty and laid it out for you as well. You just ignore it and I'm not repeating myself.

Then it's obvious what you consider evidence is woefully inaccurate.

I wouldn't want you to repeat the complete fabrications you've tried to pass off as information here.

The original poster summed it up pretty well when he challenged the supporters to provide any tangible proof.

I have yet to see any in this entire thread.

[iceberg]

Originally Posted by a_minimalist

Sorry but arguing for the sake of arguing isn't an intelligent and spirited debate. It's arguing and wasting precious time, that's it.

Its their time to spend. I think its a worn out nothing left to be said discussion but they seem to be enjoying it.

Me, I see both sides but I'm tired of people never giving enough time (to me) to let it play out. I'm frustrated also but I don't want to keep after the latest "shiny ring" as if constant change will someday equate to better.