[patteeu]

Originally Posted by tk13

Are you really this dense or incapable of productive discussion? Rain Man clearly made a post asking whether he should value Mike Wallace's opinion, or not. I said no, in my opinion, I don't think so. There is literally nothing to debate about that. It's not vague at all.

Now you and Saul Good are attempting to team up to question whether my post made logical sense? You guys are either wasting a vast amount of time trolling the board, or have very severe reading comprehension issues. Either option is a bit troubling.

Look, you're welcome to treat Wallace as though he has no credibility on anything because he's been a prima donna at times as a football player if you want, but I don't think that's sound logic.

Here's what happened.

• I said that I think there's more to the Incognito/Martin harassment than meets the eye. (Specifically, I was thinking about the racist terms used in the texts/voicemails that so many people have focused on).
• Rain Man said he thought the "more" was Incognito's character.
• I asked if his character was what made Wallace say he respected him so much? (Again, thinking about the racism angle and how Wallace's support doesn't make sense if Incognito was harassing Martin because of his race).
• You said you don't think Wallace can be a barometer for anything.

Now, I can understand that neither Rain Man nor you were aware of the thoughts that made Wallace's testimony seem so odd to me at the time (although I did explain them later). But your statement was so broad that it's obviously wrong (in the never say never sort of way). And you can disagree if you want, but I think it's pretty safe to say that Wallace is probably a decent barometer for whether or not a well known teammate is an out of control racist.

So anyway, it's a small thing and you were something like 6th or 7th to the party so after my initial facepalm reaction, I decided to delete it and avoid a fight. But since it was too late, now I've made an effort to explain myself to you in respectful terms. Maybe you can appreciate my position and maybe not. Hopefully we can move on to whatever the next topic is with a clean slate.

I'm no fan of Wallace or Incognito, nor do I think Wallace's positive assessment of Incognito vindicates the latter in any way. If anything, it casts an even darker shadow on Wallace in my mind.