I'm not saying McCarthy is "immune" but I also fell I can challenge in cases when I don't see it the way certain people call it.
"Nonstopdrivel" wrote:
Of course -- that's the point I'm trying to make. The whole purpose of a forum is discussion and debate. Some of us will have opposing viewpoints on varios issues. It would be a very boring forum if we didn't.
My objection is to the people who say or imply that we
shouldn't criticize, that it's somehow out of line. I wouldn't tell people they
shouldn't defend McCarthy, so I don't think they should say we shouldn't criticize. (I do my share of McCarthy defense anyway, and I was one of the few Ted Thompson stalwarts in the early days of that fiasco.)
You ask when a victory will be enough. I think the the answer to that is fairly simple. A victory, no matter how narrow, that comes against an opponent of superior or comparable talents and abilities, when the slim margin of victory is caused by this team's own mistakes. I've said many times that while I never
like it when my team loses, it doesn't bother me if they lose to a superior opponent after putting up a valiant fight. It's when they beat themselves that it drives me nuts. I suppose there is a bit of truth to the snide comment that some have made on this forum that fans would rather be routed than suffer a narrow defeat. At least then they know that they lost to a better team and don't have to make so many "If only . . ." statements.
"warhawk" wrote: