okay, so I can put this thing to bed once and for all -
there was no personal attack made or intended. I am truly sorry if someone took it that way. It's nice to see everyone jump in and defend the person. I was not talking about the person...it's the process.
His statement was "from what I heard of last night's webcast, Justin Wansley is a beast and this team is solid"
I hate to argue over semantics, but this sentence indicates that he is basing his opinion on Wansley and the team on portions ("from what I heard - implying he didn't hear the entire broadcast) of a game. The fact that he referenced an "average performance" (based upon last year's stats - 18.5 and 10.1) indicated to me that he did not "know" of Wansley. He made no reference of prior knowledge (reference to prior thoughts or comparison to earlier or prior year games).
My bottom line statement had nothing to do with the person - it "attacked" the process. I said that this provided some empirical evidence that the poll was a "beauty contest".
If all of you were attacking me because you're personally involved in the polling process and consider to be different than I stated, that's fine. I offered a suggested alternative -- comment on that.
Is it a real "issue"? No, it should be more about the basketball. However, every team wants to be recognized for its accomplishments. Are polls a big deal? Normally I would say no. Obviously, some disagree with me - including some of our esteemed Congressmen who want to bring the BCS polling process before Congress. If it's worthy of discussion on the Senate or House floor, why not here?
Nonetheless, a Merry Christmas to each of you and your families.
I'm done here.
there was no personal attack made or intended. I am truly sorry if someone took it that way. It's nice to see everyone jump in and defend the person. I was not talking about the person...it's the process.
His statement was "from what I heard of last night's webcast, Justin Wansley is a beast and this team is solid"
I hate to argue over semantics, but this sentence indicates that he is basing his opinion on Wansley and the team on portions ("from what I heard - implying he didn't hear the entire broadcast) of a game. The fact that he referenced an "average performance" (based upon last year's stats - 18.5 and 10.1) indicated to me that he did not "know" of Wansley. He made no reference of prior knowledge (reference to prior thoughts or comparison to earlier or prior year games).
My bottom line statement had nothing to do with the person - it "attacked" the process. I said that this provided some empirical evidence that the poll was a "beauty contest".
If all of you were attacking me because you're personally involved in the polling process and consider to be different than I stated, that's fine. I offered a suggested alternative -- comment on that.
Is it a real "issue"? No, it should be more about the basketball. However, every team wants to be recognized for its accomplishments. Are polls a big deal? Normally I would say no. Obviously, some disagree with me - including some of our esteemed Congressmen who want to bring the BCS polling process before Congress. If it's worthy of discussion on the Senate or House floor, why not here?
Nonetheless, a Merry Christmas to each of you and your families.
I'm done here.