NFL Wild Card Weekend thread

Sports Journalists Forum – Media, Newsroom & Reporting Talk

Help Support Sports Journalists Forum:

The more I think about "the question" Coen was asked at the presser, the less I have a problem with it. We've seen what passes for "journalism" in the WH Press room these days.
I think the manufactured outrage over her actions were worse than what she said. Roll your eyes and move on. It wasn't a fraction as bad as the people who clapped in Mike Gundy's presser when he went off on Jenni Carlson.
 
What makes you think he will play better? The guy panics under pressure. The biggest mistake the Steelers made defensively was not blitzing him on every down.
I never said I thought he would, where the hell did you read that?
 
Last edited:
The more I think about "the question" Coen was asked at the presser, the less I have a problem with it. We've seen what passes for "journalism" in the WH Press room these days.
I mean, assuming Jax has a post-mortem/locker room clean out day, that probably would've been the more appropriate time. Those final pressers tend to be a little more casual and local-media centric.

But it was 20 seconds and I doubt it kept a question from being asked. The people deriding it and the people defending it both need to chill the **** out
 
Last edited:
You didn't write that he would, but you did write that if he could play better, that defense is a problem. That implies that you think he can be better, doesn't it?
That does not imply ****. When I say "I'm going to buy a Bugatti if I win Powerball" doesn't mean I think I'm going to win Powerball. And since I don't play Powerball, I know I'm not winning.

Do I think Stroud can avoid making three stupid turnovers, one deep in the red zone, the next game. Yes, I think he can avoid that.
 
That does not imply ****. When I say "I'm going to buy a Bugatti if I win Powerball" doesn't mean I think I'm going to win Powerball. And since I don't play Powerball, I know I'm not winning.

Do I think Stroud can avoid making three stupid turnovers, one deep in the red zone, the next game. Yes, I think he can avoid that.

You implied a belief that he can play better earlier, and now you are more directly stating it. You aren't predicting it, but acknowledging the possibility. In other words, I was right about what you are posting. Thank you for confirming. Have a lovely evening.
 
You implied a belief that he can play better earlier, and now you are more directly stating it. You aren't predicting it, but acknowledging the possibility. In other words, I was right about what you are posting. Thank you for confirming. Have a lovely evening.
I never did imply that. I stated very clearly, "If he can play a little better".

For those that can't read, in this case if was used as a conjunction and it, in simpleton terms, means the possibility exists. Other examples are, "I have an umbrella, if it rains". There's no prediction or implication, it very simple acknowledges a possibility of such things happening. Now if that is followed with a question, like "do you think it's going to rain", then I can answer in a definitive terms, "Yes, I think it will rain."

See when you ask a question I gave a direct answer. Now that's an implication.

It has nothing to do with the first statement, which was not an implication, indirectly or otherwise, it was bringing up the possibility that something could happen.

You just made an assumption and carelessly ran with it. Had you said, "Do you think he can play better?" I would have answered. But no, you just went with your blind assumption to get into some silly rant because you speak in hot take language. And then it's "oh gotcha!" because that's what stupid children do.

Thank you for confirming you're still a jackass and you struggle with reading comprehension and, no those two things are not related, but you've managed to possess both traits. Have a lovely evening.
 
I never did imply that. I stated very clearly, "If he can play a little better".

For those that can't read, in this case if was used as a conjunction and it, in simpleton terms, means the possibility exists. Other examples are, "I have an umbrella, if it rains". There's no prediction or implication, it very simple acknowledges a possibility of such things happening. Now if that is followed with a question, like "do you think it's going to rain", then I can answer in a definitive terms, "Yes, I think it will rain."

See when you ask a question I gave a direct answer. Now that's an implication.

It has nothing to do with the first statement, which was not an implication, indirectly or otherwise, it was bringing up the possibility that something could happen.

You just made an assumption and carelessly ran with it. Had you said, "Do you think he can play better?" I would have answered. But no, you just went with your blind assumption to get into some silly rant because you speak in hot take language. And then it's "oh gotcha!" because that's what stupid children do.

Thank you for confirming you're still a jackass and you struggle with reading comprehension and, no those two things are not related, but you've managed to possess both traits. Have a lovely evening.
In other words, you implied exactly what you said I implied, then you stated it directly, but because you have a personal issue with me and a desperate need to pick a fight here, you wrote all that to try to muddy the waters and failed.

Then you included a false claim about my reading comprehension to try to prop up the pathetic personal attack at the end of your post. I'm not going to argue the jackass part for two reasons. One, you are entitled to your opinion. Two, I love the unintentional irony of you calling someone else a jackass.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top