It is currently Sat Apr 27, 2024 1:32 am

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 84 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Bernstein the ageist
PostPosted: Thu Oct 18, 2012 11:35 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2007 11:17 am
Posts: 72289
Location: Palatine
pizza_Place: Lou Malnatis
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
FavreFan wrote:
Jerry Kramer and Ted Washington are silly comparisons. Compare a guy like Jake Thomas or Jake Long to Jerry Kramer. Jerry Kramer was definitely not more athletic than those guys.

I'd also put JJ Watt's athleticism up against any DE you can find.


Not really. The style of the game has dictated the types of players you have on the respective lines.

I dont know what this means in regards to what I posted. My statements still stand.

_________________
Fare you well, fare you well
I love you more than words can tell
Listen to the river sing sweet songs
To rock my soul


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Bernstein the ageist
PostPosted: Thu Oct 18, 2012 11:35 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2006 12:38 pm
Posts: 39560
Location: Barfagloggle, Indiana
pizza_Place: Pizza Hut
JORR, would you disagree that you are also ageist, favoring old over new? You, I, and FavreFan have had some NBA discussions about this stuff before.

_________________
Kid Cairo's Boers & Bernstein YouTube Channel

Kid Cairo: 2013 March Madness Tournament Winner!

"Cowabunga? Cowa fucking piece of dog shit! This game is diarrhea coming out of my dick!"


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Bernstein the ageist
PostPosted: Thu Oct 18, 2012 11:37 am 
Offline
1000 CLUB
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 21, 2006 5:12 pm
Posts: 17947
pizza_Place: 6 characters
A lot of what's being said in this thread sounds like one belief is that widespread athletic talent in a sport cannot evolve over time.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Bernstein the ageist
PostPosted: Thu Oct 18, 2012 11:52 am 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sun Apr 04, 2010 10:00 am
Posts: 77041
Location: Chicago Heights
pizza_Place: Aurelio's
The Original Kid Cairo wrote:
JORR, would you disagree that you are also ageist, favoring old over new? You, I, and FavreFan have had some NBA discussions about this stuff before.



I don't believe that to be the case. I never attempt to diminish the great players of today. It seems to me that it's usually some younger guy attempting to diminish the greats of the past.

To RFDC's question, yes, the style of play in the NBA has changed, but it certainly isn't more athletic, as illustrated by the lower scores and lower shooting percentages.

_________________
His mind is not for rent to any God or government.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Bernstein the ageist
PostPosted: Thu Oct 18, 2012 11:52 am 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sun Apr 04, 2010 10:00 am
Posts: 77041
Location: Chicago Heights
pizza_Place: Aurelio's
Ugueth Will Shiv You wrote:
A lot of what's being said in this thread sounds like one belief is that widespread athletic talent in a sport cannot evolve over time.



And I'm always flabbergasted at how people can go through years of school without understanding evolution.

_________________
His mind is not for rent to any God or government.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Bernstein the ageist
PostPosted: Thu Oct 18, 2012 11:53 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2008 2:28 pm
Posts: 29948
Location: SW Burbs
Ugueth Will Shiv You wrote:
A lot of what's being said in this thread sounds like one belief is that widespread athletic talent in a sport cannot evolve over time.

Shut up. Golf isn't even a sport.

_________________
FavreFan wrote:
Im pretty hammered right now.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Bernstein the ageist
PostPosted: Thu Oct 18, 2012 11:56 am 
Offline
1000 CLUB
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 21, 2006 5:12 pm
Posts: 17947
pizza_Place: 6 characters
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
Ugueth Will Shiv You wrote:
A lot of what's being said in this thread sounds like one belief is that widespread athletic talent in a sport cannot evolve over time.



And I'm always flabbergasted at how people can go through years of school without understanding evolution.


I also hate Catholics.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Bernstein the ageist
PostPosted: Thu Oct 18, 2012 11:56 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2007 11:17 am
Posts: 72289
Location: Palatine
pizza_Place: Lou Malnatis
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
The Original Kid Cairo wrote:
JORR, would you disagree that you are also ageist, favoring old over new? You, I, and FavreFan have had some NBA discussions about this stuff before.



I don't believe that to be the case. I never attempt to diminish the great players of today. It seems to me that it's usually some younger guy attempting to diminish the greats of the past.

To RFDC's question, yes, the style of play in the NBA has changed, but it certainly isn't more athletic, as illustrated by the lower scores and lower shooting percentages.

The shooting percentages are much higher today actually.

_________________
Fare you well, fare you well
I love you more than words can tell
Listen to the river sing sweet songs
To rock my soul


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Bernstein the ageist
PostPosted: Thu Oct 18, 2012 11:57 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 2:00 pm
Posts: 28489
spanky wrote:
Ugueth Will Shiv You wrote:
A lot of what's being said in this thread sounds like one belief is that widespread athletic talent in a sport cannot evolve over time.

Shut up. Golf isn't even a sport.

Seems you have a little angst today Spanky, everything ok?

_________________
2018
#ExtendLafleur


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Bernstein the ageist
PostPosted: Thu Oct 18, 2012 11:59 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2008 2:28 pm
Posts: 29948
Location: SW Burbs
Hawg Ass wrote:
spanky wrote:
Ugueth Will Shiv You wrote:
A lot of what's being said in this thread sounds like one belief is that widespread athletic talent in a sport cannot evolve over time.

Shut up. Golf isn't even a sport.

Seems you have a little angst today Spanky, everything ok?

I'm cool.

That other thread taught me that it was ok to hate Ugie.

_________________
FavreFan wrote:
Im pretty hammered right now.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Bernstein the ageist
PostPosted: Thu Oct 18, 2012 12:00 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sun Apr 04, 2010 10:00 am
Posts: 77041
Location: Chicago Heights
pizza_Place: Aurelio's
FavreFan wrote:
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
The Original Kid Cairo wrote:
JORR, would you disagree that you are also ageist, favoring old over new? You, I, and FavreFan have had some NBA discussions about this stuff before.



I don't believe that to be the case. I never attempt to diminish the great players of today. It seems to me that it's usually some younger guy attempting to diminish the greats of the past.

To RFDC's question, yes, the style of play in the NBA has changed, but it certainly isn't more athletic, as illustrated by the lower scores and lower shooting percentages.

The shooting percentages are much higher today actually.



No, they aren't. Last season the league shot .448. In '76-'77 the league shot .465.

_________________
His mind is not for rent to any God or government.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Bernstein the ageist
PostPosted: Thu Oct 18, 2012 12:02 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2005 6:45 pm
Posts: 37241
Location: Lovetron
pizza_Place: Malnati's
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
Ugueth Will Shiv You wrote:
A lot of what's being said in this thread sounds like one belief is that widespread athletic talent in a sport cannot evolve over time.



And I'm always flabbergasted at how people can go through years of school without understanding evolution.


:lol:

_________________
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
The victims are the American People and the Republic itself.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Bernstein the ageist
PostPosted: Thu Oct 18, 2012 12:25 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2007 11:17 am
Posts: 72289
Location: Palatine
pizza_Place: Lou Malnatis
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
FavreFan wrote:
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
The Original Kid Cairo wrote:
JORR, would you disagree that you are also ageist, favoring old over new? You, I, and FavreFan have had some NBA discussions about this stuff before.



I don't believe that to be the case. I never attempt to diminish the great players of today. It seems to me that it's usually some younger guy attempting to diminish the greats of the past.

To RFDC's question, yes, the style of play in the NBA has changed, but it certainly isn't more athletic, as illustrated by the lower scores and lower shooting percentages.

The shooting percentages are much higher today actually.



No, they aren't. Last season the league shot .448. In '76-'77 the league shot .465.

I guess I was thinking of the 1960's. Still, I dont know that there is a correlation between athleticism and FG% as a collective. There certainly is none with individuals.

Besides, we have had this discussion before, as Kid pointed out. I think you are misframing it by saying people dont understand evolution. It's not an evolution issue. Besides the diet/drugs/training advantage that today's athletes have, there's also a much larger talent pool to draw from. Of course a guy like Sam Jones could hang with Dwyane Wade. There's just a lot more Wades today than there were Sams back then.

_________________
Fare you well, fare you well
I love you more than words can tell
Listen to the river sing sweet songs
To rock my soul


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Bernstein the ageist
PostPosted: Thu Oct 18, 2012 12:30 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2005 6:45 pm
Posts: 37241
Location: Lovetron
pizza_Place: Malnati's
I'm wondering how many dunks there were in 76-77 versus the past year.

_________________
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
The victims are the American People and the Republic itself.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Bernstein the ageist
PostPosted: Thu Oct 18, 2012 12:51 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 2:00 pm
Posts: 28489
spanky wrote:
Hawg Ass wrote:
spanky wrote:
Ugueth Will Shiv You wrote:
A lot of what's being said in this thread sounds like one belief is that widespread athletic talent in a sport cannot evolve over time.

Shut up. Golf isn't even a sport.

Seems you have a little angst today Spanky, everything ok?

I'm cool.

That other thread taught me that it was ok to hate Ugie.

Pfffttt....old news

_________________
2018
#ExtendLafleur


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Bernstein the ageist
PostPosted: Thu Oct 18, 2012 1:01 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 19, 2009 11:19 am
Posts: 23917
pizza_Place: Jimmy's Place
FavreFan wrote:
Besides, we have had this discussion before, as Kid pointed out. I think you are misframing it by saying people dont understand evolution. It's not an evolution issue. Besides the diet/drugs/training advantage that today's athletes have, there's also a much larger talent pool to draw from. Of course a guy like Sam Jones could hang with Dwyane Wade. There's just a lot more Wades today than there were Sams back then.


The problem is the people who think Babe Ruth wouldn't be a star today, Walter Johnson didn't throw 97mph, and Dick Butkus was too slow to play in today's games. Those arguments are just silly. Outliers back then would still be outliers today.

_________________
Reality is your friend, not your enemy. -- Seacrest


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Bernstein the ageist
PostPosted: Thu Oct 18, 2012 1:04 pm 
Offline
1000 CLUB
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 21, 2006 5:12 pm
Posts: 17947
pizza_Place: 6 characters
spanky wrote:

That other thread taught me that it was ok to hate Ugie.


That's a given.

Seriously though; it seems like there are two trains of thought constantly contradicting one another in this thread.

You either have the notion that athletes are uniformly better now than they were in the past, thus suggesting that today's individual players are better than superstars from yesteryear, or the notion that superstars in the past were better than superstars in modern day. You can't have both.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Bernstein the ageist
PostPosted: Thu Oct 18, 2012 1:06 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Aug 24, 2010 10:16 am
Posts: 20082
pizza_Place: Aurelios
Ugueth Will Shiv You wrote:
spanky wrote:

That other thread taught me that it was ok to hate Ugie.


That's a given.

Seriously though; it seems like there are two trains of thought constantly contradicting one another in this thread.

You either have the notion that athletes are uniformly better now than they were in the past, thus suggesting that today's individual players are better than superstars from yesteryear, or the notion that superstars in the past were better than superstars in modern day. You can't have both.


I see most people giving credit to both generations of players.

_________________
drinky wrote:
If you hate Laurence, then don't listen - don't comment. When he co-hosts the B&B show, take that day off ... listen to an old podcast of a Bernstein solo show and jerk off all day.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Bernstein the ageist
PostPosted: Thu Oct 18, 2012 1:13 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2007 11:17 am
Posts: 72289
Location: Palatine
pizza_Place: Lou Malnatis
Hatchetman wrote:
FavreFan wrote:
Besides, we have had this discussion before, as Kid pointed out. I think you are misframing it by saying people dont understand evolution. It's not an evolution issue. Besides the diet/drugs/training advantage that today's athletes have, there's also a much larger talent pool to draw from. Of course a guy like Sam Jones could hang with Dwyane Wade. There's just a lot more Wades today than there were Sams back then.


The problem is the people who think Babe Ruth wouldn't be a star today, Walter Johnson didn't throw 97mph, and Dick Butkus was too slow to play in today's games. Those arguments are just silly. Outliers back then would still be outliers today.

I agree with that. But I think the mean is higher today than it was back then, for reasons I explained. When it comes to sports, I've noticed people tend to have sillier opinions on the generational gap of athletes than in just about any other area or subject.

_________________
Fare you well, fare you well
I love you more than words can tell
Listen to the river sing sweet songs
To rock my soul


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Bernstein the ageist
PostPosted: Thu Oct 18, 2012 1:16 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Aug 24, 2010 10:16 am
Posts: 20082
pizza_Place: Aurelios
FavreFan wrote:
Hatchetman wrote:
FavreFan wrote:
Besides, we have had this discussion before, as Kid pointed out. I think you are misframing it by saying people dont understand evolution. It's not an evolution issue. Besides the diet/drugs/training advantage that today's athletes have, there's also a much larger talent pool to draw from. Of course a guy like Sam Jones could hang with Dwyane Wade. There's just a lot more Wades today than there were Sams back then.


The problem is the people who think Babe Ruth wouldn't be a star today, Walter Johnson didn't throw 97mph, and Dick Butkus was too slow to play in today's games. Those arguments are just silly. Outliers back then would still be outliers today.

I agree with that. But I think the mean is higher today than it was back then, for reasons I explained. When it comes to sports, I've noticed people tend to have sillier opinions on the generational gap of athletes than in just about any other area or subject.


That Shakespeare couldnt hold Sorkin's jock.

_________________
drinky wrote:
If you hate Laurence, then don't listen - don't comment. When he co-hosts the B&B show, take that day off ... listen to an old podcast of a Bernstein solo show and jerk off all day.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Bernstein the ageist
PostPosted: Thu Oct 18, 2012 1:20 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2010 4:29 pm
Posts: 38101
pizza_Place: Lou Malnatis
Hank Scorpio wrote:
FavreFan wrote:
Hatchetman wrote:
FavreFan wrote:
Besides, we have had this discussion before, as Kid pointed out. I think you are misframing it by saying people dont understand evolution. It's not an evolution issue. Besides the diet/drugs/training advantage that today's athletes have, there's also a much larger talent pool to draw from. Of course a guy like Sam Jones could hang with Dwyane Wade. There's just a lot more Wades today than there were Sams back then.


The problem is the people who think Babe Ruth wouldn't be a star today, Walter Johnson didn't throw 97mph, and Dick Butkus was too slow to play in today's games. Those arguments are just silly. Outliers back then would still be outliers today.

I agree with that. But I think the mean is higher today than it was back then, for reasons I explained. When it comes to sports, I've noticed people tend to have sillier opinions on the generational gap of athletes than in just about any other area or subject.


That Shakespeare couldnt hold Sorkin's jock.
Obama isn't even a spoke on FDR's wheelchair

_________________
Proud member of the white guy grievance committee

It aint the six minutes. Its what happens in those six minutes.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Bernstein the ageist
PostPosted: Thu Oct 18, 2012 1:21 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2007 11:17 am
Posts: 72289
Location: Palatine
pizza_Place: Lou Malnatis
Hank Scorpio wrote:
FavreFan wrote:
Hatchetman wrote:
FavreFan wrote:
Besides, we have had this discussion before, as Kid pointed out. I think you are misframing it by saying people dont understand evolution. It's not an evolution issue. Besides the diet/drugs/training advantage that today's athletes have, there's also a much larger talent pool to draw from. Of course a guy like Sam Jones could hang with Dwyane Wade. There's just a lot more Wades today than there were Sams back then.


The problem is the people who think Babe Ruth wouldn't be a star today, Walter Johnson didn't throw 97mph, and Dick Butkus was too slow to play in today's games. Those arguments are just silly. Outliers back then would still be outliers today.

I agree with that. But I think the mean is higher today than it was back then, for reasons I explained. When it comes to sports, I've noticed people tend to have sillier opinions on the generational gap of athletes than in just about any other area or subject.


That Shakespeare couldnt hold Sorkin's jock.

Yeah but that's only because Sorkin actually writes his own stuff. Sorkin writes a ton of stuff.

_________________
Fare you well, fare you well
I love you more than words can tell
Listen to the river sing sweet songs
To rock my soul


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Bernstein the ageist
PostPosted: Thu Oct 18, 2012 1:26 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2006 12:38 pm
Posts: 39560
Location: Barfagloggle, Indiana
pizza_Place: Pizza Hut
I admit to being ageist when it comes to the NBA. My NBA heyday is the 90s, so I prefer that decade over anything that came before it and almost anything after.

Last night I watched the Seattle Sonics vs. Golden State Warriors from 1992 thinking, "Shawn Kemp is the greatest athlete I've ever seen." I stand by that.

_________________
Kid Cairo's Boers & Bernstein YouTube Channel

Kid Cairo: 2013 March Madness Tournament Winner!

"Cowabunga? Cowa fucking piece of dog shit! This game is diarrhea coming out of my dick!"


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Bernstein the ageist
PostPosted: Thu Oct 18, 2012 1:26 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Aug 24, 2010 10:16 am
Posts: 20082
pizza_Place: Aurelios
Issac Newton was a bum. Guy couldnt even pick apples himself, had to wait for gravity to bring them to him. Stephen Hawking is a dude, even in his wheelchair. Newton was white, tiny and slow. Hawking drives around in a motorized chair!! He rolls a 4.2 40!!

_________________
drinky wrote:
If you hate Laurence, then don't listen - don't comment. When he co-hosts the B&B show, take that day off ... listen to an old podcast of a Bernstein solo show and jerk off all day.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Bernstein the ageist
PostPosted: Thu Oct 18, 2012 1:33 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 02, 2011 4:29 pm
Posts: 39749
Location: Everywhere
pizza_Place: giordanos
Someone sort of said it I think but it seems to me you cannot compare across eras as every seems to want to do so easy. There must be some sort of weighting as in statistics. Do you really think that Butkus or any of the other examples wouldn't have used all of the new tools available to the new guys? He likely would have been just as "cut", juiced or whatever else these new guys are. I would guess Karl Malone would also look a little different playing these days even though that wasn't so long ago. Until someone can figure out the cross-era weight its just mental masturbation.

_________________
Brick wrote:
Biden is doing a GOOD job.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Bernstein the ageist
PostPosted: Thu Oct 18, 2012 1:35 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 2:00 pm
Posts: 28489
The Original Kid Cairo wrote:
I admit to being ageist when it comes to the NBA. My NBA heyday is the 90s, so I prefer that decade over anything that came before it and almost anything after.

Last night I watched the Seattle Sonics vs. Golden State Warriors from 1992 thinking, "Shawn Kemp is the greatest athlete I've ever seen." I stand by that.

He sure was, to be able to play that many games and have that much sex. I will tip my cap to him.

_________________
2018
#ExtendLafleur


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Bernstein the ageist
PostPosted: Thu Oct 18, 2012 1:41 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2006 6:29 pm
Posts: 54266
Location: Pearl Harbor, Waukesha, and other things that make no sense
pizza_Place: Lou Malnati's
FavreFan wrote:
Sorkin actually writes his own stuff.

And then recycles it.

_________________
Molly Lambert wrote:
The future holds the possibility to be great or terrible, and since it has not yet occurred it remains simultaneously both.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Bernstein the ageist
PostPosted: Thu Oct 18, 2012 1:42 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2010 4:55 pm
Posts: 3287
pizza_Place: Olde Silver Tavern, Manalapan, NJ [R.I.P.?]
Butkus discussions = fallacies on parade.

1. The "Fuck You, Chicago!" Fallacy: [athlete/coach/team/tradition] that Chicago fans enjoy is stupid, pointless, and overrated and must be attacked at every turn for the good of the city.

Ex. LeBron James is better at every aspect of playing basketball than Michael Jordan ever was, and if you disagree, you're basketball stupid.

2. The Sports Evolution Fallacy: sports are better now thanks to various rule changes (such as the shot clock, or tighter illegal-contact penalties) that make old players obsolete; however, modern players would flourish under the old rules.

Ex. If Dick Butkus traveled forward in time and was forced to cover tight ends over the middle, he would go undrafted. If Ray Lewis traveled backward in time and played by the old rules, his dominance would be so complete that the NFL would have been forced to shut down.

3. The Player Evolution Fallacy: all players who play now are better than all players who used to play, thanks primarily to improvements in nutrition and training; however, said improvements would have no impact on past players.

Ex. If Sam Jones could travel forward in time and experience the benefits of personal trainers and hyperbaric chambers, he wouldn't even be drafted, but if Dwyane Wade played his entire career in Chuck Taylors and subsisted on a diet of cheeseburgers and Lucky Strikes, he would still be a magnificent athletic specimen.

4. The Homoerotic Fallacy: self-explanatory.

Ex. Have you seen tapes of George Mikan? He's just a big slow white dork. Then you watch last year's Finals, and LeBron is stomping around the court with this comic book superhero body. He's got muscles on top of muscles. He's just...so...big.

5. The Fun With Racial Coding Fallacy: black guys are better than white guys at everything, because we say so.

Ex. Dick Butkus was a hulking, freakishly athletic white guy. Ray Lewis is a hulking, freakishly athletic black guy. Ergo, Ray Lewis is better.

_________________
The Bulls haven't done anything wrong, and they're not going to do anything wrong.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Bernstein the ageist
PostPosted: Thu Oct 18, 2012 1:44 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Aug 24, 2010 10:16 am
Posts: 20082
pizza_Place: Aurelios
Image

_________________
drinky wrote:
If you hate Laurence, then don't listen - don't comment. When he co-hosts the B&B show, take that day off ... listen to an old podcast of a Bernstein solo show and jerk off all day.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Bernstein the ageist
PostPosted: Thu Oct 18, 2012 1:46 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2010 9:09 am
Posts: 19926
pizza_Place: Papa Johns
Dave In Champaign wrote:
Butkus discussions = fallacies on parade.

1. The "Fuck You, Chicago!" Fallacy: [athlete/coach/team/tradition] that Chicago fans enjoy is stupid, pointless, and overrated and must be attacked at every turn for the good of the city.

Ex. LeBron James is better at every aspect of playing basketball than Michael Jordan ever was, and if you disagree, you're basketball stupid.

2. The Sports Evolution Fallacy: sports are better now thanks to various rule changes (such as the shot clock, or tighter illegal-contact penalties) that make old players obsolete; however, modern players would flourish under the old rules.

Ex. If Dick Butkus traveled forward in time and was forced to cover tight ends over the middle, he would go undrafted. If Ray Lewis traveled backward in time and played by the old rules, his dominance would be so complete that the NFL would have been forced to shut down.

3. The Player Evolution Fallacy: all players who play now are better than all players who used to play, thanks primarily to improvements in nutrition and training; however, said improvements would have no impact on past players.

Ex. If Sam Jones could travel forward in time and experience the benefits of personal trainers and hyperbaric chambers, he wouldn't even be drafted, but if Dwyane Wade played his entire career in Chuck Taylors and subsisted on a diet of cheeseburgers and Lucky Strikes, he would still be a magnificent athletic specimen.

4. The Homoerotic Fallacy: self-explanatory.

Ex. Have you seen tapes of George Mikan? He's just a big slow white dork. Then you watch last year's Finals, and LeBron is stomping around the court with this comic book superhero body. He's got muscles on top of muscles. He's just...so...big.

5. The Fun With Racial Coding Fallacy: black guys are better than white guys at everything, because we say so.

Ex. Dick Butkus was a hulking, freakishly athletic white guy. Ray Lewis is a hulking, freakishly athletic black guy. Ergo, Ray Lewis is better.


You make me hot with your B&B stuff. You run a ton of it.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 84 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 11 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group