The excited fan vs. the realistic fan

[Fredbeard]

After being a fan for 23 years , I would consider myself comfortably numb.

 

[Fredbeard]

My optimistic view of the cowboys upcoming season :
19-0
My pessimistic view of the cowboys upcoming season: 6-6-4

 

[DanA]

Realistically.

This is the best roster we have had in a 20 years. I don't really know what we have in Kellen Moore, and I don't really rate Garrett tactically (he has other strengths) so it's hard to say we can go all the way. But I do think we have a list capable of going place even with a tougher schedule this season.

 

[kskboys]

If we’re using the definition of “dissatisfied with everything,” then, no, the “realists” haven’t been kinda right. They have just been disappointed and consistently angry.

It doesn’t mean they were likely to be any better at predicting the outcomes of seasons. I know for a fact my own predictions in the annual won-loss prediction threads have generally been more conservative than a lot of so-called realists. Because it’s not about what we think will happen. It’s about attitude towards the team.

You’re right that I, at least, have been dismissive of that consistently negative attitude around here for a long time.

There's your answer: "so-called". You're falling for the moniker they have falsely labeled themselves w/.

True realists aren't all that disappointed, because they saw what was coming, mostly. There were a few surprises, of course.

Don't fall for the negative nancies calling themselves realists. They are not.

 

[Idgit]

There's your answer: "so-called". You're falling for the moniker they have falsely labeled themselves w/.

True realists aren't all that disappointed, because they saw what was coming, mostly. There were a few surprises, of course.

Don't fall for the negative nancies calling themselves realists. They are not.

I hope I haven’t given the impression I believe they’re actually realistic. Literally everything I’ve posted here is that my issue is that the are not.

 

[cern]

I think people on these boards will argue about anything, substantive or not. we have a two party governmental system. prosecutors vs defense attorneys. different religions. gas vs diesel engines. meat eaters vs vegans. it is the nature of the human race. our tribal nature. that's reality.

 

[cowboyblue22]

the results of the last ten years pretty much speak for themselves so I expect with the same frontoffice and head coach and his staff u will pretty much keep seeing the same results good enough to win regular season games and maybe make the play offs and then one and done in the playoffs it is what it is and its pretty much what I expect keep happening so ihave set my expectations accordingly when u expect average and that's what u get then u are not really disappointed when it happens

 

[cern]

over the past few years we have acquired the best running back in the game. (imo) we now have the best #1 wr we've had since Michael Irvin. we have a pretty good qb who will only get better. if healthy, the o-line is poised to be outstanding once again. weak link on offense is the te position. on defense we have a great edge rusher in Lawrence. and for the first time in years two outstanding linebackers on the field at the same time. the d-backs are vastly improved over the last two years. how is that not getting better. and most importantly, Stephen is taking over the helm.

 

[DallasEast]

https://cowboyszone.com/threads/definition-of-a-pessimist.425291/page-2#post-8896208

There are academic definitions.

and

There are inaccurate descriptions people adopt for themselves that are hybrids of academic self-representations.

People choose which of the two describes themselves best, regardless whether they accept, disregard, comprehend or not understand what one or the other means for them personally.

 

[Big_D]

People love to put a label on stuff. Nothing wrong with fans who have zero confidence in this HC to go any further than he has. He's part of the problem. Some just don't want to admit that problem exists. Get a new coach in here and renew hope and optimism. Ride the same wave for a dozen years expecting a different outcome and that hope is simply non existent.

 

[cern]

https://cowboyszone.com/threads/definition-of-a-pessimist.425291/page-2#post-8896208

There are academic definitions.

and

There are inaccurate descriptions people adopt for themselves that are hybrids of academic self-representations.

People choose which of the two describes themselves best, regardless whether they accept, disregard, comprehend or not understand what one or the other means for them personally.

or ofttimes just the passive aggressive puerile name calling directed at anyone who doesn't agree with them.

 

[DallasEast]

or ofttimes just the passive aggressive puerile name calling directed at anyone who doesn't agree with them.

I mostly agree but accurate or inaccurate name-calling occurs beyond discussions involving realist/pessimist/optimist finger pointing and sports-related conversations.

 

[Doomsday101]

People love to put a label on stuff. Nothing wrong with fans who have zero confidence in this HC to go any further than he has. He's part of the problem. Some just don't want to admit that problem exists. Get a new coach in here and renew hope and optimism. Ride the same wave for a dozen years expecting a different outcome and that hope is simply non existent.

HC always shares in the blame. So to say he is part of the problem I don't think it untrue. However for argument sake say he gets this team over the hump and they get the SB win how many will actually credit him for it? We have people here whose heals are so far dug in that even a championship will not stop them from saying he has to go. I like Garrett and I think the team has played hard under him. I think it took a couple of great comebacks from one of the top QB in the league to knock Dallas out in 2 post season games in Rodgers. If in the end Garrett gets fired then I will have no issue what so ever given the time he has been given but by the same token I would just as soon see him and this team get over the hump and win it all.

 

[Paradox]

https://cowboyszone.com/threads/definition-of-a-pessimist.425291/page-2#post-8896208

There are academic definitions.

and

There are inaccurate descriptions people adopt for themselves that are hybrids of academic self-representations.

People choose which of the two describes themselves best, regardless whether they accept, disregard, comprehend or not understand what one or the other means for them personally.

A realist, according to your example, takes into account all of the fine details to make a decision. If that were true, many of those details should infinitely spiral through one's mind without a decision because of the unknown variables. Those variables would inevitably lead down paths where you would be forced to choose, in good faith, with either optimism or pessimism in making those choices.

Perception is in the eye of the beholder. That's important to note. Even with statistics, a realist would need to take every detail into account, such as lingering injuries, weather, a death in the family, poor officiating etc., which would again lead to an optimistic or a pessimistic choice, or infinite thought loops that lead to no decision at all. If there were stats written for every detail of the pertinent NFL personnel's lives, including brain activity, that the realist could compare then I'd believe a few possibly existed.

In summary, there are almost positively no pure realists on the planet. Possibly in a mental institution somewhere. I don't believe anyone falls directly into one of those three categories, but rather that humans are fickle and often jump between optimistic or pessimistic calculations to form what by definition is a realists conclusion.

 

[DasSchnitzel]

Is this one of those trap threads where anything slightly optimistic is called delusional and everything cynical is called realistic?

 

[Doomsday101]

A realist, according to your example, takes into account all of the fine details to make a decision. If that were true, many of those details should infinitely spiral through one's mind without a decision because of the unknown variables. Those variables would inevitably lead down paths where you would be forced to choose, in good faith, with either optimism or pessimism in making those choices.

Perception is in the eye of the beholder. That's important to note. Even with statistics, a realist would need to take every detail into account, such as lingering injuries, weather, a death in the family, poor officiating etc., which would again lead to an optimistic or a pessimistic choice, or infinite thought loops that lead to no decision at all. If there were stats written for every detail of the pertinent NFL personnel's lives, including brain activity, that the realist could compare then I'd believe a few possibly existed.

In summary, there are almost positively no pure realists on the planet. Possibly in a mental institution somewhere. I don't believe anyone falls directly into one of those three categories, but rather that humans are fickle and often jump between optimistic or pessimistic calculations to form what by definition is a realists conclusion.

True. I do consider myself somewhat of a realist in that I see things that I feel could lead to the season being a failure. I also see a lot of talent on this team that now has more experience and a taste of both winning and losing in post season to build off of. So I do try and see both sides of the coin. In the end a big factor is my own perceptions and yes my own bias. I'm a Dallas Cowboys fan so I will always error in their favor as opposed to trashing them and only seeing the negatives. I try to see both the best and the worst of this team

 

[TwoDeep3]

I worded it the way I had worded it in the post you quoted earlier.

For an actual 'realist,' it's not that they 'don't see the success path,' it's that they describe the likely path as they see it--whether it's likely to be successful or not. My exact criticism is that so many calling themselves "realists," as you say, are just people who 'don't see a success path' at all, whether there's one there or not. To use your analogy, they're mechanics who tell you you need a brake job no matter what, and then tell you they're just being realistic. Spoiler alert: they aren't actually realistic.

A lot of assuming you know what someone does to come up with their opinion in your post.

 

[DallasEast]

A realist, according to your example, takes into account all of the fine details to make a decision. If that were true, many of those details should infinitely spiral through one's mind without a decision because of the unknown variables. Those variables would inevitably lead down paths where you would be forced to choose, in good faith, with either optimism or pessimism in making those choices.

Perception is in the eye of the beholder. That's important to note. Even with statistics, a realist would need to take every detail into account, such as lingering injuries, weather, a death in the family, poor officiating etc., which would again lead to an optimistic or a pessimistic choice, or infinite thought loops that lead to no decision at all. If there were stats written for every detail of the pertinent NFL personnel's lives, including brain activity, that the realist could compare then I'd believe a few possibly existed.

In summary, there are almost positively no pure realists on the planet. Possibly in a mental institution somewhere. I don't believe anyone falls directly into one of those three categories, but rather that humans are fickle and often jump between optimistic or pessimistic calculations to form what by definition is a realists conclusion.

Interesting.

 

[cern]

I mostly agree but accurate or inaccurate name-calling occurs beyond discussions involving realist/pessimist/optimist finger pointing and sports-related conversations.

yes it does. by passive aggressive puerile people. of course sometimes they're just rude.

 

[cern]

A realist, according to your example, takes into account all of the fine details to make a decision. If that were true, many of those details should infinitely spiral through one's mind without a decision because of the unknown variables. Those variables would inevitably lead down paths where you would be forced to choose, in good faith, with either optimism or pessimism in making those choices.

Perception is in the eye of the beholder. That's important to note. Even with statistics, a realist would need to take every detail into account, such as lingering injuries, weather, a death in the family, poor officiating etc., which would again lead to an optimistic or a pessimistic choice, or infinite thought loops that lead to no decision at all. If there were stats written for every detail of the pertinent NFL personnel's lives, including brain activity, that the realist could compare then I'd believe a few possibly existed.

In summary, there are almost positively no pure realists on the planet. Possibly in a mental institution somewhere. I don't believe anyone falls directly into one of those three categories, but rather that humans are fickle and often jump between optimistic or pessimistic calculations to form what by definition is a realists conclusion.

good points. at 3-5, my realistic nature concluded we would probably lose 4 of the next five games. at this point I was a pessimist. but then we got Amari cooper and went on a 7-1 run. at this point I was an optimist. ergo, it appears a realistist can be both a pessimist and an optimist. schrodinger's cat.