Page 3 of 4
Posted: Wed Feb 11, 2004 1:23 pm
by BossHog
Ok random boy... or should we say anonymouse.
I won't dignify your comment with too many of my own. I run this board and it takes far too much of my time as it is... I can't wipe asses too.
Gibbs - quick fix.
And er... polemics is the aggressive attack on someone's opinions and refuting those opinions... so are you agreeing with people being aggressive in citing their points, or whining about it like you did in the rest of your post?
FYI... I didn't take offense to anything other than 55 saying Gibbs was old and forgetful... which if you look through the thread, you'll see that 55 conceded that was not his intention and was in fact the wrong thing to do.
We have a smack forum that I'm well versed at using if you're taking this personally... otherwise... try sticking to your own point of view rather than jumping on others for the sake of 'polemics'.
Posted: Wed Feb 11, 2004 1:27 pm
by randomHog
i like anonymouse...that's cute!
Posted: Wed Feb 11, 2004 1:37 pm
by Guest
whining about it? I told you to not get so defensive and you say stop whining? that's like saying "i am rubber you are glue...etc", excellent work, administrator!
the art of discussion, argument, polemics, dialectics is found in the ability of people to influence others, but to be influenced, here's the part you misunderstood, you must opine with an open mind, not the closed mind so prevalent in these 'discourses'.
gibbs success now will be achieved differently than before, he must straighten out an organization, from top to bottom, and that means fixing our personnel and executive department so that it stands on solid ground AFTER he leaves. he has a lot of work to do.
Posted: Wed Feb 11, 2004 1:41 pm
by DEHog
randomHog wrote:oh yeah another thing..."never changed my view". hmmm..so if no one changes their view what's the point of discussing?
polemics are about influencing others
Maybe for you... but I'm here to discuss and hear the views of others, not to change them.
Posted: Wed Feb 11, 2004 1:50 pm
by BossHog
the art of discussion, argument, polemics, dialectics is found in the ability of people to influence others, but to be influenced, here's the part you misunderstood, you must opine with an open mind, not the closed mind so prevalent in these 'discourses'.
I didn't misunderstand anything... I understood exactly what you were saying... and you're implying that because i DIDN'T change my mind that my opinion is closed minded... arrogant.
Perhaps you should ask youself whether or not you're out of your element here. Ask around.. I encourage debate and discussion, not seek to stop it. I don't WANT people to 'take my side', I want them to figure out what their own side is... but that sure doesn't mean that I have to take theirs either... and it sure doesn't mean that I'm close minded.
... tear off the Word of the Day pad and write down in your little journal that you used your Webster's word, and then ask yourself if knowing what polemics means and being a polemicist are really the same thing.
Posted: Wed Feb 11, 2004 2:05 pm
by randomHog
bosshog, excuse me, i'll make sure to dumb down my remarks so i don't get you confused. not trying to hurt you.
ask myself, blah, blah, etc.? that makes not even the slightest scintilla of sense to me. I said polemics is about influencing others, and therefore this is not about showing a spine, but opening your mind (which you even suggested when you said people come up with their own ideas. see, people get influenced, then come up with their own ideas, and that's where the art of polemics is involved.
So I'm not sure where your attack on me was directed, since it made no sense (i think, in a way, i was asking YOU that question - maybe it's the rubber/glue thing again?), but this all seems worthless unless we influence each other to achieve a greater enlightenment, and that means stepping back and analyzing b4 we defend our hero gibbs in a rage.
Posted: Wed Feb 11, 2004 2:12 pm
by Wysocki
Gambit, Terrell Owens and I want to fight you - right on that friggin' blue star in that half-open hell-hole you call a stadium. Name the time and bring anyone you want
Posted: Wed Feb 11, 2004 2:29 pm
by JPFair
One thing that people may be overlooking is the fact that Gibbs might not bo "coaching" when he's 70, but who's to say he won't be running the show from somewhere else? In other words, wasn't there talk that he might have some ownership stake, or perhaps a GM position after 5 years.
And, another thing: Joe's contract is for 5 years. He hasn't said that's all he'll do has he? I mean, Vermeil is 67 and just signed an extension. Suppose Gibbs takes us to the Super Bowl in four or five years, and he's as healthy as he's ever been and wants to continue to coach. You think Snyder would say no? While it's not likely, but it is possible Joe Could coach for a few years beyond the 5 year contract.
Posted: Wed Feb 11, 2004 2:31 pm
by dallasisdead2004
Posted: Wed Feb 11, 2004 2:38 pm
by BossHog
bosshog, excuse me, i'll make sure to dumb down my remarks so i don't get you confused. not trying to hurt you.
So your route to open communication is to insult those you are trying to communicate with? Dumb em down all you want, i'm as sharp as they come... but I can't educate all of the ignorant.
ask myself, blah, blah, etc.? that makes not even the slightest scintilla of sense to me. I said polemics is about influencing others, and therefore this is not about showing a spine, but opening your mind (which you even suggested when you said people come up with their own ideas. see, people get influenced, then come up with their own ideas, and that's where the art of polemics is involved.
You just have a fundamenatal misunderstanding of what polemics is don't you? Polemics is NOT about open minds, polemics is NOT about influencing others... polemics is just the aggressive attack on the opinion of someone else. It is just an agressive refuting of someone else's opinion... it has nothing to do with the outcome of those same said discussions.
... but this all seems worthless unless we influence each other to achieve a greater enlightenment, and that means stepping back and analyzing b4 we defend our hero gibbs in a rage.
you're just off course here man, what can I say. Someone can attack Gibbs all they want but let it be for something tangible. We have no reason to believe his age will be ANY detriment and to stereotypically cast him as old and forgetful because he went to the hospital to have his meds checked is just plain insulting and HAS NOTHING TO DO with Gibbs' abilities as a coach.
You want to talk to me about how he doesn't know the modern game, or how he doesn't understand elements of free agency, or how he doesn't understand today's primadonna athletes... then that's cool... I can't profess to know yet, nor can anyone else, as to whether or not he can apply his magic to the modern game. But rememeber that this all started because i took issue with 55 slagging on joe's age... it had NOTHING to do with joe's abilities... and it was unfounded and insulting... so I stated that i thought that was exactly what it was. I wasn't questioning his 'questioning joe', i was questioning him because his trepidation had no basis in fact, and was based solely on a sterotypical view of the elderly.
You know... the ironic thing is... in your supposed effort to' open up communication and dialogue', you have completely destroyed the integrity of the original thread thus ending any legitimate, valid, constructive conversation.
Posted: Wed Feb 11, 2004 2:42 pm
by skinsNut
Smacked by BH!
polemics... from the Webster's website:
1 a : an aggressive attack on or refutation of the opinions or principles of another b : the art or practice of disputation or controversy -- usually used in plural but sing. or plural in constr.
2 : an aggressive controversialist : DISPUTANT
I don't see the words open minded or influence in there??????
Posted: Wed Feb 11, 2004 2:45 pm
by BossHog
dallasisdead2004 wrote:In fact, I would almost like to see Boss or DEHog delete your posts...you are a guest, and we've established that you are young, closed-minded, and arrogant.
See, I don't do that... I try to let everyone say their piece. If there isn't profanity or spam in it... i'll never delete it.
That's how closed minded I am.
Posted: Wed Feb 11, 2004 2:57 pm
by Wysocki
I was glad you didn't delete him Boss. Good decision, and I learned a new word! Now if we can learn when to use weather/whether and you're/your etc. we'll all be a little more well-rounded...
Posted: Wed Feb 11, 2004 2:58 pm
by dallasisdead2004
True.
I was simply infuriated with some of the things this guy has said. Everyone should be able to speak their mind. But I would rather hear or learn big words associated with a football discussion and not about "rubber and glue" or "whining" or something...
In my opinion, Random has not only disrespected Joe, but many other members on this site.
Posted: Wed Feb 11, 2004 3:06 pm
by Guest
my job is done then!
Posted: Wed Feb 11, 2004 3:08 pm
by Wysocki
DisDead - I agree...
Posted: Wed Feb 11, 2004 3:15 pm
by Wysocki
nice witty finish guest...you ran out of words too quickly! I can see your hands quivering from here...
Posted: Wed Feb 11, 2004 3:16 pm
by BossHog
Anonymous wrote:my job is done then!
You just showed your true colors my friend, and I'm sure lost any small amount of public opinion that you may have gained up to that point. Pure class.
I'm not sure why you're not logging in with your username instead of anonymously logging in as guest or randomHog, but I guess people that need stuff dumbed down for them like me ain't smart enough to do no book learning, and certainly wouldn't be able to ever figure that kind of stuff out... right?
Why'd the chicken cross the road?
To go to the other side and post anonymously instead of with his username.
Re: Trust Joe Gibbs to make the right choices
Posted: Wed Feb 11, 2004 5:02 pm
by daddywatson
welch wrote:Hello, all,
I "confess" that I'm old enough that I could say I'm ferom the Joe Kuharich (check spelling), Mike Nixon, Bill McPeak, Otto Graham, Vince Lombardi, Bill Austin, George Allen, Jack Pardee, as well as Joe Gibbs era.
Consodering it all carefully, thinking over those coaches, Joe Gibbs is the best ever. Lombardi was only here for a year before cancer got him, and old George was something special, but Joe Gibbs is beyond them all.
An old-timer's not-so-old story: in the winter of '91, Coach Gibbs had two young QB's. He told Stan Humphries, approximately: you are my quarterback. You have a strong arm, you're the better athlete, you have the release: now, go study the playbook. IT's your job to lose.
Humphries went home and got fat. He ignore the playbook.
Mark Rypien, a guy who always came through, and a guy that everyone always said was just filling in until the Redskins found a Real QB...well, Rypien studied the playbook inside out and upside down. He worked and worked. He showed up to camp in great shape, and knowing the offense better than anyone except maybe Joe Gibbs himself. Humphries came to camp and chased women.
That year, Humphries did not play a down. Not one.
Rypien led the Redskins to 14-2. They won the Superbowl, against the predictions of a ceertain Mr. Zimmerman from Sports Illustrated, and Rypien was MVP.
Joe Gibbs judges talent and character and brains. Patrick Ramsey seems to have those. If he does, really does, then Ramsey will make it.
For younger fans, be assured. There is not a thing to worry about. Gibbs takes players and makes them better. He always has. He quietly discards the real cranks, which is why I find it interesting that some current Redskin players are reported to have chosen not to contact him. It's their choice...in a way, they are helping Gibbs choose who to cut.
Best regards to all, and I wish mini-camp started tomorrow.
Welch - Very well put. I too go back quite aways. Since '73 I've been watching the Burgandy and Gold. And I too remember a man who made alot out very little. That being in regard to him being able to hone or even develope a player(and not just him, but his entire staff. This is a team effort and Gibbs said it even before this year.)into something special.
Does the name Timmy Smith ring a bell to anybody???
But Patrick Ramsey is the name we and everybody else is talking and pondering about here. This is the young talent who performed so well this last year, against overwhelming odds. From the media early on, to his coach, to his offensive line, to himself. Sometimes holding the ball too long. But, as I've said before, this is a kid who really has only logged one full season into his resume'.
Patrick Ramsey is a QB, who even right now, is showing signs of maturity, an understanding of what he needs to do and at times, even brilliance. I do hope that he doesn't get discouraged by the bringing in a vet. But I also hope that(and I'm sure it is, because Coach Gibbs said it)the position is open, like every other position, to competion. With bright individual like Ramsey, I believe he'll shine.
All Hail Washington!!!!!
Posted: Wed Feb 11, 2004 5:19 pm
by Brandon777
BossHog wrote:Anonymous wrote:my job is done then!
You just showed your true colors my friend, and I'm sure lost any small amount of public opinion that you may have gained up to that point. Pure class. I think it's safe to say his true colors are navy blue and silver.
I'm not sure why you're not logging in with your username instead of anonymously logging in as guest or randomHog, but I guess people that need stuff dumbed down for them like me ain't smart enough to do no book learning, and certainly wouldn't be able to ever figure that kind of stuff out... right?
Why'd the chicken cross the road?
To go to the other side and post anonymously instead of with his username.
Posted: Wed Feb 11, 2004 6:13 pm
by psummersjr
Well, the vocabulary discussion aside, I would like to address Coach Gibbs' moves of late for one second...
Perhaps Ramsey isn't the answer to our QB prayers? Yes, he played admirably last season but you know who's opinion I trust more on that, Joe Gibbs'. As Americans (I assume most of us on this board are), we are, by the sacrifice of many nobel many before us, have been given the right to speak our opinion but when it comes to sports, many of us, including myself, seem to always think we know more than those who have made a good living experiencing, evaluating and studying the very topics we opine on (is that correct English, not so sure). Anyway, my point is that we should probably trust the judgement of the man who won 3 Superbowls and is already in the football Hall of Fame! Plus, nothing has actually been done yet! As someone pointed out early in this thread, perhaps Coach Gibbs was just baiting the Cowboys!!
I don't think we should rush to judgement on Gibbs' overtures to Brunell much less RUMORS about Ramsey's status. Once this all plays out, we'll all be in a better position to judge... but even then, I'll defer to Joe Gibbs!
Posted: Wed Feb 11, 2004 6:18 pm
by Guest
Ramsey isn't going anywhere. He said today he welcomes competition at quarterback.
Posted: Wed Feb 11, 2004 6:44 pm
by Wysocki
psum...what? say that again...
Posted: Thu Feb 12, 2004 8:51 am
by psummersjr
Wysocki... Huh?
Gibbs will make the right decision
Posted: Fri Feb 13, 2004 1:31 am
by welch
Hello, all,
I don't hink we need to worry (except my spelling when I up late!)
Gibbs likes developing young quarterbacks, and he has had several. He likes having a an experienced backup to the rising kid...consider Doug Williams backing Jay Schroeder.
Gibbs is not a Snyder QB shuffler: Gus-the-bus, then Trent Green, then Johnson, then Jeff George (wow!!!) then Tony Banks, then a bunch of guys from U Florida, etc.
That is not how this team will run.
Gibbs will evealuate his guys, and if Ramsey has "it", then Ramsey will play. Maybe he'll share time with someone, at least until the line figures out that they can protect the QB betrer by flattening the defenders for a horse of a runner than if they retreat and clutch and hold. Bugel will fix that.
Gibbs settles a team. He gets the players playueying their parts, even the few stars like Wilbur Marshall. He molds a receiving corps like Monk, Clark, and Sanders. Gen subtly modifies his schemes to fit his talent (remember Kelvin Bryant and George Rogers?), but he does the same basic things.
He does the basic things so often that the players never make mistakes. He has all of that movement and misdirection and covering before the snap, but they run the same few plays underneath it.
He method makes it possible to bring in a guy and mold him into a Redskin if the guy has Gibs qualities.
He did it every single season, right down to the last plays of his last game. A slippery field made for a slippery ball and a slippery handoff to Brian Mitchell, after the Skins had pounded the guts out of the fancy 49's.
Nothing fundamental ever changed.
So Ramsey will probably stay. He has shown he's willing to learn from Gibbs. Maybe they will pick up Brunell as a backup. Whatever he decides, it will be from cool logic, and it will probably be right.
Remember the Schroeder / Lachey trade? Jay S. had led the Skins to 12-4, had lost on the wind-bowl NFC championship to the Giants. He was a bit overconfident ("This wind won;t bother me.") and he failed big, though he went to the pro-bowl.. Joe stuck with him, but by the middle of the next year, Doug W. was starting. And over the winter, they traded the hot-armed young start to San Diego for a left tackle.
Jim Lachey turned out to be the best left tackle they ever had...big as anyone, but agile enough to stock Lawrence Taylor. LT never had a on-on-one sack again on Lachey. Eventually, the Giants took to hiding Taylor around, so he could match up against anyone other than Lachey.
Joe knows.
