Letters to the Editor
Rayon Fog
Published Letters: 188 Editor's Choice: 7
-
Thad at it again...
[Read the article: Once and for all, proof that Macs are cheaper than PCs]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I don't why I feel compelled to waste my time trying to help defend this platform against all this ignorance, but I do.
Once again you distort what was actually said to fit your BS.
"The guy points out to you, directly, that OSX wouldn't work on his machine. You didn't even dispute that contention"
No, he did NOT say it wouldn't work on his machine. He said it worked sluggishly, which was agreed. The first version of OSX was sluggish on that previous-generation iMac, but not bad at all on the generation of iMacs that were shipped in early 2001 just prior to the OSX release. Was it slow? Yes to a degree depending on your rig. Slow to the point of being inoperable, absolutely not unless you either 1) didn't have enough RAM, 2) were on a much older G3, 3) had your rig bogged down with too much crap. What, do you want someone to call the first release of OSX a failure? It surely was not.
"Your solution was, apparently, that he should have stopped using his computer entirely for what? A year? Until Apple fixed OSX so it would be adequate for his machine?
Apparent only to you, obviously. The solution offered was NOT to stop using his computer. It was to stick with 9.1 until OS X was updated to work efficiently on that rig. You know what? It was updated in less than a month. And Apple also offered OS 9.2 for those who were having problems with the transition or needed a more stable Classic environment under OS X. There were plenty of options that were just flat ignored and used as cannon fodder by the OP.
And lay off with this crap about Apple users not admitting flaws with Apple. There have been plenty of Apple users publicly unhappy with the iPhone, the reduced price of the iPhone, the battery issues on the iPod, the toilet-seat clamshell iBook, the battery issue on the TiBook, the one-button mouse just to name a few. Of course you choose to ignore that to further your BS.
-
@ Lynx
[Read the article: King Kaufman's Sports Daily]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]You have been respectful all the way and I agree that nothing you have said has been vitriolic, but I disagree with what you are saying just the same.
I don't really understand what the "norms of the game" are other than "see ball, get ball" and "advance the ball to the opponent's end zone for a touchdown or a field goal". Beyond that, I think your argument only holds water if you are dealing with an opponent that has clearly outmatched personnel, which is most definitely not the case at the NFL level.
Walsh did it (55-10 in SB 24 comes to mind). Gibbs did it. Shula did it (seems like the hypocrite always comes out and lobbies for his 72 Fins when that record is threatened in any way). Tuna did it. Levy did it. Landry did it. Everyone, given the opportunity, has done it.
Tom Brady has over 500 passing yards on his last nine possessions. That's just absurd. Colt Brennan-like numbers against stiffer competition. I don't love or hate the Pats, but I will say that if you don't like it or can't appreciate it, it all screams one thing: stop him!
-
@ Pancho
[Read the article: King Kaufman's Sports Daily]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]You mean like Dallas did?
-
@ EWilson
[Read the article: King Kaufman's Sports Daily]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]OK, I'll take that bait.
I guess we first have to establish what constitutes a blowout, right? For argument's sake, let's say it a lead of 3.5 touchdowns early in the 4th.
Bill Walsh, between 1983 and 1986, did it 16 times. 48-0 v Rams, 51-7 v Vikes, 41-0 v Bears, to name a few.
Landry did it nine times over the course of 2 years.
There is definitely more where that came from.
-
E Wilson
[Read the article: King Kaufman's Sports Daily]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Ok, so do you think that Walsh "only" ran up the score 16 times in 3 years because he eased off the gas in those other games or because that was all he could get? So far this year, the Pats have brought in Cassell 6 games, which is on average more times than Walsh or Landry brought in their backups. I think it's highly doubtful that given the opportunity, they all wouldn't have been blowouts. Same goes for any of your High Order of Noble Head Coaches. I'm not saying Belichick is a member of that group (I personally think he's an asshole of the Tom Coughlin variety), but he's done nothing wrong with regards to his actual game management.
-
@ Lynx 12:10
[Read the article: King Kaufman's Sports Daily]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]No, those were just the first two programs I looked up. These people get paid to score points. The other guys get paid to stop them from scoring points. This isn't Pop Warner or the AYSO - fragile egos need not apply. Heck, I don't even have a problem with college "running it up", if that's what you want to call it. It's all part of the process.
-
@ pageiger
[Read the article: King Kaufman's Sports Daily]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I especially liked Al's one-word response immediately following Madden's soliloquy. "Amen".
-
@ GW in Ohio
[Read the article: King Kaufman's Sports Daily]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]"The BCS got it right ... LSU's only two losses were in triple overtime, to two teams (Kentucky, Arkansas) that played superlative football."
Now hold on there. USC in 2003 only had one loss, in triple-overtime, at Cal - a team that played "superlative" football. We all know what the BCS did to USC that year.
So does this mean all those claiming that LSU is the only champion of 2003 will finally shut up? Doubt it.