Top 25 talk

[ElRetornodelEspencio]

Mapping the timeline...

McHugh accused me of having an axe to grind on Nov. 30th. Pat jumped in on Dec. 1st with his "maybe this isn't the place for you" comment, which basically opened the door for everyone to follow suit and imply that this isn't the place for me. That's when everything changed. Before that it was just McHugh with his haughty air like he knew it all and I was just a peon in comparison. Everyone else was taking things at face value, and maybe poking the bear in a mostly joking way (like Hopefan or Hopeful or whatever the handle is, I can't remember right now).

But the point is that as usual, I'm right. Things did definitely change after (and soon after at that) Pat's adversarial post personally attacking me that followed up McHugh's baseless accusation.

Neither of those posts were born of anything but personal contempt. I don't feel much responsibility at all for that, especially when everyone else had been just fine with me up to that point. Dave didn't like having his opinion challenged, and Pat just doesn't like me and has been unjust with me in the past, so no real surprise there. He's tremendously ungrateful for the benefit I provided his network of sites in the past.

[Pat Coleman]

**** it. you're the god of d3 basketball. I don't give a **** anymore.

I'm about to throw my computer out into the rain and just not give a **** about anything anymore.

Anyone up for biking from Barrow to the Tierra del Fuego? I'm pretty much done with the world.

Your simplified timeline glosses over the fact that you dropped this post in, which was reported and brought me to the board. Play the victim card if that helps you but I don't know if people will agree. This is the trigger, not my post.

[ElRetornodelEspencio]

**** it. you're the god of d3 basketball. I don't give a **** anymore.

I'm about to throw my computer out into the rain and just not give a **** about anything anymore.

Anyone up for biking from Barrow to the Tierra del Fuego? I'm pretty much done with the world.

Your simplified timeline glosses over the fact that you dropped this post in, which was reported and brought me to the board. Play the victim card if that helps you but I don't know if people will agree. This is the trigger, not my post.

Interesting. So I basically say whatever, i don't care, I'm done, and that's your cue to come in and throw a Molotov cocktail?

Maybe I just like using asterisks in creative ways. Like ****. Maybe I should use asterisks for every **** letter **** I write. (not curse words).

Seems to me if you had let things be, you might already **** the outcome you desired in the first place. (also not cursing)

[HOPEful]

I wish we put side bets on what would happen when Marietta loses. It's easy for me to play "Monday Morning Quarterback" and say I would have put money that Spence would continue to fight his now absurd opinion like a lunatic, but really, that's what I would have bet on!! I promise!

[Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan)]

I'm curious how much closer Neumann will get to the top 25 this week.

I've watched two of their games.  Supremely talented team; I'm not seeing much discipline, which is difficult.  I haven't really looked at my ballot yet.  Lots of losses, so I'm not saying I won't vote for them, but I doubt that I will just yet.

  The test will be handling Scranton @ home on the 30th.

There are an unbelievable number of teams that have tough opponents waiting for them between now and New Year's Day.  A lot of teams I'd prefer to wait on.

By wait do you mean not give them credit for what they've already done just because you didn't expect them to do it?

Teams need to have some decent wins before I'll buy in.  I did end up voting for Neumann, by the way.  After looking at the options, their wins thus far have been more impressive than a lot of other teams.  As I said, looking through many of those teams, they've got game coming up in the next two weeks that, if they win, will give me much more confidence in their abilities.

[Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan)]

You can't be an effective Marietta booster, or even a halfway-decent gadfly, if your attitude alienates people into skipping right past your posts or abandoning this particular board altogether. And sac is right: If you have a personal issue with someone, take it to PMs. Don't air your dirty laundry here.

Seriously? After this post?

Physician, heal thyself.

Btw, it is the introduction of a new way of thinking that runs counter to the norm that has made this thread confrontational. I just happen to be the person with those ideas.

As you all have proven (and seem to quite revel in), you'll do the same if it's someone else. TGHISTIHOFMEHSREXOI!!

If you have an argument to make, then make it.  If you can manage one post without filling it with argumentative fallacies, you might be taken seriously.  There is a real difference between requiring a fair hearing and requiring agreement - you need to find that difference.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies

[ElRetornodelEspencio]

You can't be an effective Marietta booster, or even a halfway-decent gadfly, if your attitude alienates people into skipping right past your posts or abandoning this particular board altogether. And sac is right: If you have a personal issue with someone, take it to PMs. Don't air your dirty laundry here.

Seriously? After this post?

Physician, heal thyself.

Btw, it is the introduction of a new way of thinking that runs counter to the norm that has made this thread confrontational. I just happen to be the person with those ideas.

As you all have proven (and seem to quite revel in), you'll do the same if it's someone else. TGHISTIHOFMEHSREXOI!!

If you have an argument to make, then make it.  If you can manage one post without filling it with argumentative fallacies, you might be taken seriously.  There is a real difference between requiring a fair hearing and requiring agreement - you need to find that difference.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies

I already have.

[ElRetornodelEspencio]

I wish we put side bets on what would happen when Marietta loses. It's easy for me to play "Monday Morning Quarterback" and say I would have put money that Spence would continue to fight his now absurd opinion like a lunatic, but really, that's what I would have bet on!! I promise!

Who would have had "the trolls come out in force and my positions and previous statements get misrepresented"?

I don't have the right personality or mental state to be gaslighted. If the military couldn't do it, I rather doubt you all will be able to.

[Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan)]

You can't be an effective Marietta booster, or even a halfway-decent gadfly, if your attitude alienates people into skipping right past your posts or abandoning this particular board altogether. And sac is right: If you have a personal issue with someone, take it to PMs. Don't air your dirty laundry here.

Seriously? After this post?

Physician, heal thyself.

Btw, it is the introduction of a new way of thinking that runs counter to the norm that has made this thread confrontational. I just happen to be the person with those ideas.

As you all have proven (and seem to quite revel in), you'll do the same if it's someone else. TGHISTIHOFMEHSREXOI!!

If you have an argument to make, then make it.  If you can manage one post without filling it with argumentative fallacies, you might be taken seriously.  There is a real difference between requiring a fair hearing and requiring agreement - you need to find that difference.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies

I already have.

Clearly you have not.  When you say, "I think X," and others say, "I disagree.  My opinion is Y," and follow it with a few detailed arguments, that's generally the end.  Pressing on to somehow force the other person into agreement means you don't really understand the difference between being heard and being agreed with.  You've had the same argument here at least three times now and spent most of the last few just insulting the opponent, which is, in my opinion, the lowest form of argumentative fallacy.  Move on, man.  There are a lot of actual games in the Top 25 that people could be talking about.

Eau Claire and WashU both went down to IIAC teams this week.  Or maybe you might be interested in breaking down the Marietta loss to John Carroll and what voters might be able to learn about each team by it?

[ElRetornodelEspencio]

I'm curious how much closer Neumann will get to the top 25 this week.

I've watched two of their games.  Supremely talented team; I'm not seeing much discipline, which is difficult.  I haven't really looked at my ballot yet.  Lots of losses, so I'm not saying I won't vote for them, but I doubt that I will just yet.

  The test will be handling Scranton @ home on the 30th.

There are an unbelievable number of teams that have tough opponents waiting for them between now and New Year's Day.  A lot of teams I'd prefer to wait on.

By wait do you mean not give them credit for what they've already done just because you didn't expect them to do it?

Teams need to have some decent wins before I'll buy in.  I did end up voting for Neumann, by the way.  After looking at the options, their wins thus far have been more impressive than a lot of other teams.  As I said, looking through many of those teams, they've got game coming up in the next two weeks that, if they win, will give me much more confidence in their abilities.

If a team is highly ranked in a computer ranking by now, it's highly likely that team does have at least one quality win. To your credit, it seems you worked that out independently.

Beyond that, I would encourage you to read my post to smedindy and the associated links (and the links in that are useful too, it's basically all good stuff). The upcoming games might offer more information, but probably not as much as it seems.

[ElRetornodelEspencio]

You can't be an effective Marietta booster, or even a halfway-decent gadfly, if your attitude alienates people into skipping right past your posts or abandoning this particular board altogether. And sac is right: If you have a personal issue with someone, take it to PMs. Don't air your dirty laundry here.

Seriously? After this post?

Physician, heal thyself.

Btw, it is the introduction of a new way of thinking that runs counter to the norm that has made this thread confrontational. I just happen to be the person with those ideas.

As you all have proven (and seem to quite revel in), you'll do the same if it's someone else. TGHISTIHOFMEHSREXOI!!

If you have an argument to make, then make it.  If you can manage one post without filling it with argumentative fallacies, you might be taken seriously.  There is a real difference between requiring a fair hearing and requiring agreement - you need to find that difference.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies

I already have.

Clearly you have not.  When you say, "I think X," and others say, "I disagree.  My opinion is Y," and follow it with a few detailed arguments, that's generally the end.  Pressing on to somehow force the other person into agreement means you don't really understand the difference between being heard and being agreed with.  You've had the same argument here at least three times now and spent most of the last few just insulting the opponent, which is, in my opinion, the lowest form of argumentative fallacy.  Move on, man.  There are a lot of actual games in the Top 25 that people could be talking about.

Eau Claire and WashU both went down to IIAC teams this week.  Or maybe you might be interested in breaking down the Marietta loss to John Carroll and what voters might be able to learn about each team by it?

So now you want me to make your arguments? I've said all I wanted to say, made the larger point. It's now up to the reader to decide what to do with it.

I thought that's what everyone wanted.

But if you insist: voters might learn from Saturday. John Carroll is good, especially at home, and really especially when their backs are against the wall and they're looking at potentially having their regular season hopes in Moran's last season dashed in the 2nd week of December.

I would think that anyone bestowed with a vote would not need to be told that. I was very concerned about this game, maybe more than any on the schedule.

[Coach C]

Returning to the thread, I have to say that Neumann is the best team no one is voting for at this point. Scary fast, Pressure D, quick in the post, good mid-range shooters and slashers. Yeah they have some trouble with the long range shot, but they can certainly play with the top 25.

[Gregory Sager]

You can't be an effective Marietta booster, or even a halfway-decent gadfly, if your attitude alienates people into skipping right past your posts or abandoning this particular board altogether. And sac is right: If you have a personal issue with someone, take it to PMs. Don't air your dirty laundry here.

Seriously? After this post?

Physician, heal thyself.

I don't have a personal issue with you. I do find it annoying that you've hijacked the board with a wearying repetition of the same argument on behalf of Marietta, but annoyance with someone's posts isn't a personal issue.

I'm simply trying to explain to you how you're coming across, and how it's negatively affecting the very thing that you're trying to do here, which is to persuade everyone that you're right about Marietta being undervalued in the poll. But it appears that my effort was wasted, so I'll cease and desist.

[Gregory Sager]

Returning to the thread, I have to say that Neumann is the best team no one is voting for at this point. Scary fast, Pressure D, quick in the post, good mid-range shooters and slashers. Yeah they have some trouble with the long range shot, but they can certainly play with the top 25.

What Neumann did to Catholic in the second half of their game on Saturday afternoon was a real eye-opener. Nobody else has done that to the Cardinals this season.

[ElRetornodelEspencio]

You can't be an effective Marietta booster, or even a halfway-decent gadfly, if your attitude alienates people into skipping right past your posts or abandoning this particular board altogether. And sac is right: If you have a personal issue with someone, take it to PMs. Don't air your dirty laundry here.

Seriously? After this post?

Physician, heal thyself.

I don't have a personal issue with you. I do find it annoying that you've hijacked the board with a wearying repetition of the same argument on behalf of Marietta, but annoyance with someone's posts isn't a personal issue.

I'm simply trying to explain to you how you're coming across, and how it's negatively affecting the very thing that you're trying to do here, which is to persuade everyone that you're right about Marietta being undervalued in the poll. But it appears that my effort was wasted, so I'll cease and desist.

Why is it that if I repeat something, it's a problem; but when someone else repeats something to me, it's not and somehow I'm the hijacker?

Curious, that.