No. Rah rah fans ALWAYS say Packer=good.
Originally Posted by: uffda udfa
Not always, especially when it comes to linemen. A lot of rah rah types wanted Bak gone or at least not at LT because he doesn't fit the prototypical body built.... they wanted Spriggs to replace Bak last year... and this year, they wanted to move Bulaga to RG and Spriggs to RT (again, about prototypical body built, more than actual play skill.
I LOVE Aaron Jones. I really like Michael Clark. Thrilled Marty B. is our TE. I'm not automatically calibrated to say Packer=bad like rah rah is to say Packer=good. There's a difference.
Originally Posted by: uffda udfa
No, from what I see, you're exactly the same in that regard. As neither are automatically calibrated 100% in either direction.
I was talking to some fans that you would call "rah rah" and was telling them that Ringo looks like he's going to make it this year... and they just went and bad mouth him and praised Price... as just like you, the "rah rah" players have their favorites and least favorites too.
You see rah rah types aren't as rah rah about certain linemen (because linemen are less exciting and harder to get all rah rah about). While you aren't as boo boo about the the "skilled" players (because skilled players are easy to get all rah rah about).
It's the exact same thing.
Just because the majority of what I say comes across as negative doesn't mean it's agenda driven other than logic being the agenda.
Originally Posted by: uffda udfa
It doesn't come across as negative... it is negative. You're bad mouthing a group of people. That is negative. You're saying most players will fail. That is negative. "I think we overrate ALL of them." That is negative towards other people.
Doesn't mean it's not logical and true, but it is negative.
And you also assume the worst (which is also negative) and not logical.
~ Thompson is mentally handicapped now
~ They failed in drafting Bulaga
Which you cite things as prove with just as low standards as the rah rah types.