tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20559458.post6640668298141848611..comments2023-12-28T17:21:26.528-05:00Comments on The Joe Cribbs Car Wash: The Works, Bounces off me, sticks to you-styleJerry Hinnenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15097537044668238939noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20559458.post-21532976775005254882008-09-19T12:38:00.000-04:002008-09-19T12:38:00.000-04:00Per the Abuurn version video.At the 0:57 mark I th...Per the Abuurn version video.<BR/><BR/>At the 0:57 mark I think I saw a piece of poop fly out of the QBs britches.<BR/><BR/>Don't get me wrong, I'm a Dawgs fan, but ya'lls defense is ferocious and I wouldn't want to see that running at me.Mackiehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16936918113198252525noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20559458.post-23940118536203001222008-09-18T23:20:00.000-04:002008-09-18T23:20:00.000-04:00Jerry,In my most recent feature-length column (Wee...Jerry,<BR/><BR/>In my most recent feature-length column (Weekly Affirmation), I talked about all the issues we're dealing with here (and a few others).<BR/><BR/>No one has commented on the column and how it did (or didn't) clarify the point made in my two-sentence little sound-bite remark.<BR/><BR/>The difference? My editor put that "5 Thoughts" feature as the lead story on the front page. The feature-length column got buried.<BR/><BR/>You know that I like to write at great length ("if you want profundity, go read Matt Zemek," I can remember you saying on this blog a few years ago...), so it's so painfully ironic for me to face a controversy based on one of the most concise and limited things I've ever written, and in a realm outside my feature columns, which are my central responsibility at CFN along with the Instant Analysis pieces.<BR/><BR/>About OSU-USC: I've written about mental toughness and the psychology of college football for the 7 years I've been at CFN. My unique literary voice at CFN is based on emphasizing psychology and other holistic things that Fiutak and others don't bother with. (Fiutak just being a stone-cold knowledge-based expert with incredibly comprehensive industry-wide knowledge. I'm not in his league. I can only emphasize my own strengths.)<BR/><BR/>I still won't regret the fundamental content/essence of what I said--and that might seem lame--but I definitely could have written the statement better. Moreover, I also made a big mistake in terms of how much I assumed in terms of:<BR/><BR/>A) how the words would be interpreted;<BR/><BR/>B) how Beanie Wells' absence would cloud the larger issue;<BR/><BR/>and C) the complexity of making a point rooted in something that can't be neatly summed up with hard numbers or empirical data (the topic of psychology, which was the underlying foundation for my remarks in the 5 Thoughts piece).<BR/><BR/>Thanks for hearing me out.<BR/><BR/>It's amazing how two sentences can be the source of both great misunderstanding and yet great complexity inside the (often-cluttered) mind of its imperfect author.Matt Zemekhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11549151766426130779noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20559458.post-65800122862988994112008-09-18T16:14:00.000-04:002008-09-18T16:14:00.000-04:00danmnit! i thought i might have screwed that quote...danmnit! i thought i might have screwed that quote up. i should probably turn in my nerd card forever for that. now i have to fix it.JR Suicidehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14367778966328167533noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20559458.post-19846975863936609552008-09-18T16:00:00.000-04:002008-09-18T16:00:00.000-04:00Matt, I'll admit that I probably don't read your l...Matt, <BR/><BR/>I'll admit that I probably don't read your longer columns regularly enough to make a blanket statement about whether you own up to mistakes or not. The Mandel line has been edited to specify to the OSU-USC game in particular.<BR/><BR/>But, sorry, you're just wrong on this one. Once again, this is what you wrote about OSU-Ohio:<BR/><BR/>"Very simply, ladies and gentlemen, if you think that Ohio State is in trouble against USC because of the way the Buckeyes played against Ohio, you know nothing about college football and have failed to pay attention to this sport during your lifetime."<BR/><BR/>Maybe you're trying to claim you MEANT something different, but what this quote SAYS is: if you look at the way OSU played against Ohio and decide they're not good enough to hang with USC, you're an idiot. Well, guess what: those people were not idiots. They were right. It's your suggestion that the results of the Ohio game be ignored when evaluating OSU-USC was wrong. Based on the dead-even box score of the Ohio game, even a fired-up, focused OSU wasn't going to be enough to cause USC any problems, because USC was the better team. And even according to yourself, that's the way it played out. I mean, you say the reason you wrote this statement was because Buckeye fans were panicking--do you honestly think that after seeing their team get crushed by 32 points on national TV, they shouldn't have been panicking? In retrospect, wasn't panicking the most reasonable option? How can you claim otherwise?<BR/><BR/>As for UGA-Az St., it's not a perfect analogy to USC-OSU because UNLV is very likely a better team than Ohio and because Az. St. is at home rather than going to Athens. But I believe UGA should still be the heavy favorite, yes, and I expect they'll play like it and win by 2-3 scores. <BR/><BR/>Whatever happens, though, it's not going to change anything about the point I made above. Of course teams look ahead. Happens all the time. But there's a difference between looking ahead and riding out a first-half challenge vs. playing Ohio dead even at home despite having a 5-1 turnover advantage. And if you don't realize that, forgive me, but you know nothing about college football and have failed to pay attention to this sport during your lifetime.Jerry Hinnenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15097537044668238939noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20559458.post-10878685631893975832008-09-18T13:16:00.000-04:002008-09-18T13:16:00.000-04:00What was I wrong about?Can you tell me what, speci...What was I wrong about?<BR/><BR/>Can you tell me what, specifically, I was wrong about?<BR/><BR/>I'm always willing to admit being wrong, but of course, if you don't read my regular columns and only focus on CFN's sound-bite-based (short-form) feature, 5 Thoughts (which is not under my own editorial supervision), then we have a stacked deck to begin with.<BR/><BR/>Here's this week's look-ahead game test:<BR/><BR/>Arizona State lost at home to UNLV, looking ahead to Georgia.<BR/><BR/>A team that loses at home to UNLV as a 23-point favorite should, empirically, get crushed by Georgia.<BR/><BR/>Let's see what happens.<BR/><BR/>PS--Do read my columns to see if I can admit being wrong or not. Please. In the interests of fairness. If you're going to take a journalist to task, you need to read the balance of his/her work, instead of cherry picking. You would have noticed that, in week two, I admitted that I made a wrong call on Stanford (after having stated in week one that I had made an inaccurate assessment of Stanford in the offseason).Matt Zemekhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11549151766426130779noreply@blogger.com