Quote:
Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud
JFC.
I'm REALLY ****ING SICK OF THIS TYPE OF BULLSHIT.
This year, Gretz, a nearly 40 year journalist, has been accused of lying by internet ****ing twerps because it doesn't fit their stereotype of Scott Pioli.
They've accused Whitlock of the same exact thing.
Personally, I think you all need a ****ing cockpunch. Maybe it'll snap your asses back into reality.
It's absolutely ridiculous the kind of shit that's said around here. I'm sorry you weren't in the room when Gretz and Kuharich spoke, so I guess that means it's didn't happen.
You're smarter than this. |
This is the difference between you and me. You treat this stuff like it's a religious or political discussion and this is the DC forum. I'm sorry, but I'm not a zealot like that. I don't have anything vested in Pioli, I'm not defending him in any way, and I'm not going to get in some heated debate over it.
I never said Gretz was a liar. I suggested that
Kuharich may have had an axe to grind. Not Gretz. I happen to believe the same thing when it comes to Whitlock and Waters ; I think Waters had a problem with the new front office and coaching staff when they arrived, and I believe that's where the bit about winning games with players off the street that Whitlock wrote about came from. He was upset and Whitlock was his outlet. I think it may have been the same thing with Kuharich. Maybe it wasn't. I don't have any way of knowing, but I will *always* take things like that with a grain of salt.
I am happy to see that apparently Haley and the rest of the staff have gotten Waters to drink whatever kool-aid they're giving the rest of the teams, because he's been the model teammate and team leader this offseason.
In any case, as I said, I don't think it's really germane to the discussion (by 'it' I mean the Gretz/Kuharich thing). I really don't think it matters whether the '09 draft sucked because Pioli listened to New England guys or because Pioli listened to Kansas City guys. It sucked either way. It doesn't even really matter that I think the 2009 draft class as a whole was extremely weak. No, what really matters to me is whether anything changed between the '09 and '10 drafts, whether the kind of braindead moves I saw in 2009 -
none of which I liked, beginning with the acquisition of Cassel and moving on to the drafting of Tyson Jackson - would be repeated in 2010.
I've liked what I've seen since then. I liked seeing the majority of the scouting staff let go after the '09 draft, I like the direction they went and the players they drafted in 2010, I like the coordinators they've hired, and I like many of the things I saw during the 2010 preseason. I'm generally pleased with 2010 so far.
Saying that is not defending Pioli in any way. All I'm doing is fairly (I think...) judging Pioli based on what I see. I saw failure in 2009. Everything about last year was failure, from the hiring of coordinators to the acquisition of vets and draft picks.
But I'm not the kind of person who's going to arbitrarily declare doom or victory based on the events and results of just one year. It's not enough. I need to see what happens during the season in 2010, and then I need to see 2011. So far this offseason I'm optimistic. Have they made exactly the moves that I would have, or taken exactly the players that I wanted? No. But I see the logic in the things they've done, and I've seen what I think are the beginning of results on the field.
But it's not a personal discussion for me. I don't have anything to gain or lose from the success or failure of Scott Pioli.