Chef Jim Posted June 24, 2009 Share Posted June 24, 2009 You said "good" not "great". And. yes, welcome to the real world. A good performance is sometimes not good enough to win. Last time I checked TWO teams played. Losing doesn't always mean you played terribly. Some of the best performances I have ever seen in sports were losses to an even better performance. The Bills may not have been great against the Giants, but they were certainly good. The Giants were better. I bet you my next paycheck if you asked any player from that game if they played a good game and I would imagine that to a man they would all say no. The goal is to win and they didn't so in their mind and my mind they failed...that's not good. That's like saying a 99 yard drive that ends in an interception in the end zone was a good drive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dean Posted June 24, 2009 Share Posted June 24, 2009 I bet you my next paycheck if you asked any player from that game if they played a good game and I would imagine that to a man they would all say no. The goal is to win and they didn't so in their mind and my mind they failed...that's not good. That's like saying a 99 yard drive that ends in an interception in the end zone was a good drive. Ask Thurman Thomas. He ran for 135 yards and had 55 receiving yards. I'm guessing he will say the Bills played a good game, but not good enough. I KNOW he thinks he played a good game, as he did. And TT says he had a "successful career". How is that possible if he never won the big one? "When I think back on my career, a quote from a famous book comes to my mind: It's not about me," Thomas said. "My career was successful..." http://www.accessmylibrary.com/coms2/summa...86-32551187_ITM Your point is really stupid, anyway. The team played the best team in the other division, and lost on a missed last second field goal. That isn't sucking, it's losing. It isn't the ultimate goal, but it is still good. And, it's true the player, right after the event, may not want to admit they played well, because they are disappointed they didn't achieve the ultimate goal. Looking back, I believe most will admit they played pretty well. Of course, you have to ask "what kind of obnoxious douchebag would use the perspective of the defeated athlete, to judge whether a performance was, or was not good?" We aren't participants in that event and we have the luxury of objectivity, and don't need to look at situations as either black or white. If you believe in every situation only the winner was good, and everyone else sucked, I feel VERY sorry for everyone in your life. Did you ever see the 1980 Wimbledon final between Borg and McEnroe (1-6, 7-5, 6-3, 6-7, 8-6)? Do you think Mac sucked that day because he lost? Are you so phenomenally boneheaded that you wouldn't concede he played a good match? I hope your clients have that same attitude. Even though your advice may have made them a lot of money, when they find a friend who made more money on investments than they did, one month/year/whatever, they can tell you your advice was no good, and you suck because they didn't make as much as someone else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted June 24, 2009 Share Posted June 24, 2009 Ask Thurman Thomas. He ran for 135 yards and had 55 receiving yards. I'm guessing he will say the Bills played a good game, but not good enough. I KNOW he thinks he played a good game, as he did. And TT says he had a "successful career". How is that possible if he never won the big one? "When I think back on my career, a quote from a famous book comes to my mind: It's not about me," Thomas said. "My career was successful..." http://www.accessmylibrary.com/coms2/summa...86-32551187_ITM Your point is really stupid, anyway. The team played the best team in the other division, and lost on a missed last second field goal. That isn't sucking, it's losing. It isn't the ultimate goal, but it is still good. And, it's true the player, right after the event, may not want to admit they played well, because they are disappointed they didn't achieve the ultimate goal. Looking back, I believe most will admit they played pretty well. Of course, you have to ask "what kind of obnoxious douchebag would use the perspective of the defeated athlete, to judge whether a performance was, or was not good?" We aren't participants in that event and we have the luxury of objectivity, and don't need to look at situations as either black or white. If you believe in every situation only the winner was good, and everyone else sucked, I feel VERY sorry for everyone in your life. Did you ever see the 1980 Wimbledon final between Borg and McEnroe (1-6, 7-5, 6-3, 6-7, 8-6)? Do you think Mac sucked that day because he lost? Are you so phenomenally boneheaded that you wouldn't concede he played a good match? I hope your clients have that same attitude. Even though your advice may have made them a lot of money, when they find a friend who made more money on investments than they did, one month/year/whatever, they can tell you your advice was no good, and you suck because they didn't make as much as someone else. So in your mind there is nothing between good and sucking? All I'm saying is that in my mind it was not a good performance...they lost. And I appreciate you hoping my clients think I suck. Good job nimrod. In my business it's not a competition, it's helping people do the right thing. But I could see why you wouldn't understand that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbb Posted June 24, 2009 Share Posted June 24, 2009 Unless YOU are the virgin in question, it's very creepy to have an interest in deflowering virgins. It is over-rated. It's painful for them and then there is their guilt and ambivalence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbb Posted June 24, 2009 Share Posted June 24, 2009 The Boss is one of the greatest performers in the history of ever...who cares about proficiency? By the way, he IS proficient. And if Born to Run doesn't speak to you, then what does? Also, listen to his 2002 album The Rising, if you haven't already...and then tell me how he's not proficient. What he said........Listen to The Rising and tell me he's not relevant again. What a joke. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bullpen Posted June 24, 2009 Share Posted June 24, 2009 Wow!!! A Chef Jim and Dean verbal sparring!?!?! That is NOT overrated!!! I've been waiting for this one since Leonard v Hagler!!!! *grabs lawn chair and cooler of beer* ... this one's gonna be good! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
X. Benedict Posted June 24, 2009 Share Posted June 24, 2009 The term "Thrown under the bus" is overrated. I heard this 5 times yesterday in different contexts. It is the "he went postal" of our decade. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Indy Dave Posted June 24, 2009 Share Posted June 24, 2009 The term "Thrown under the bus" is overrated. I heard this 5 times yesterday in different contexts. It is the "he went postal" of our decade. Thinking outside of the box...another overrated expression that I despise. And +1 to an earlier reference to In And Out Burger. WTF is the big deal? Major disappointment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SageAgainstTheMachine Posted June 24, 2009 Share Posted June 24, 2009 I bet you my next paycheck if you asked any player from that game if they played a good game and I would imagine that to a man they would all say no. The goal is to win and they didn't so in their mind and my mind they failed...that's not good. That's like saying a 99 yard drive that ends in an interception in the end zone was a good drive. That doesn't make much sense. The game hinged on a field goal attempt. So since Norwood missed the field goal, that means the team did not play a good game? But if Norwood DID make the field, that suddenly means the team DID play a good game? I understand, and agree with, your point about winning being the ultimate goal...but I think your logic is a little bit screwy on this one. Good efforts often fall to great efforts. Wouldn't you say the Cardinals played a good game in this last Superbowl? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GOBILLS78 Posted June 24, 2009 Share Posted June 24, 2009 HDTV Nope. 1.) Joe Buck (underrated: Sean McDonough. Should have never left the World Series booth.) 2.) Social networking 3.) Things west of the Mississippi Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WellDressed Posted June 24, 2009 Share Posted June 24, 2009 I beg to differ. Iron Man and both Christian Bale's Batmans ("Bale-man" movies?) are two of the better movies I've seen in quite some time. The first two X-Man movies were very good. The first Spiderman was quite good, as were the first two Christopher-Reeve-as-Superman movies. Now admittedly, you've also got the Fantastic Four movies, two Hulk movies (how is it that no one can turn Hulk into a decent movie?), the last two X-Man movies, the last Spiderman movie, the last several Superman movies, and if they ever make that rumored Aquaman movie I'll be first in line to see ANYTHING else. But I think there's enough truly good comic book movies that you can't realistically say that "comic book movies" as a whole are overrated. I was going to put this as #1 but it looked kind of weak.....Comic Book Movies, except Batman..??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted June 24, 2009 Share Posted June 24, 2009 That doesn't make much sense. The game hinged on a field goal attempt. So since Norwood missed the field goal, that means the team did not play a good game? But if Norwood DID make the field, that suddenly means the team DID play a good game? I understand, and agree with, your point about winning being the ultimate goal...but I think your logic is a little bit screwy on this one. Good efforts often fall to great efforts. Wouldn't you say the Cardinals played a good game in this last Superbowl? Dean said the Bills had one good outing. I my mind it was not a good outing.....because THEY LOST. Pardon me for being tough on highly paid individuals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloBill Posted June 24, 2009 Share Posted June 24, 2009 Sage's post reminds me that Mike Tyson is overrated (also just saw him in Hangover). Not denying that in his prime he was brutal and could have been the best of all time. I am saying that to me he just seemd to give up on himself and got to a point where he had little desire to box. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsPride12 Posted June 25, 2009 Share Posted June 25, 2009 Sage's post reminds me that Mike Tyson is overrated (also just saw him in Hangover). Not denying that in his prime he was brutal and could have been the best of all time. I am saying that to me he just seemd to give up on himself and got to a point where he had little desire to box. I wouldn't say Tyson is overrated, just a guy that didn't live up to his full potential which is sad but thats another topic in itself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbb Posted June 30, 2009 Share Posted June 30, 2009 Bruce's tour is in Europe these days. This is from the London Telegraph (in an article comparing him to Michael Jackson): Springsteen and his band deliver arguably the greatest and most entertaining rock and roll show the world has ever seen, and they do it with nothing but the ordinary tools of the medium, their instruments, their songs and themselves. They have been doing that for nearly forty years, calling on a body of work surely unequalled in terms of maintaining the very highest of songwriting and performing standards. The intelligence, insight, empathy, spirit and emotion exhibited in Springsteen’s music is as high now as it was back in the early seventies, maybe higher. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BUFFALOTONE Posted June 30, 2009 Share Posted June 30, 2009 Star Wars Star Trek (sci fi is sh-t) Nirvana All 'Grunge" music especially Pearl Jam A-Rod- hate to say it as a Yank Howard Stern-Artie should be driving that bus SNL-show is sh-t now Anything reality TV related And for the guy that said the Godfather. In the words of Tim Graham "You deserve a healthy kick to the nugget bag." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted June 30, 2009 Author Share Posted June 30, 2009 - The practice of bumping a week-old thread so you can hit your argument one more time. - Michael Jackson - Dessert Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbb Posted June 30, 2009 Share Posted June 30, 2009 New info, my friend......Gotta disagree with you on MJ and dessert......Neither are over-rated. Not very good for you, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbb Posted June 30, 2009 Share Posted June 30, 2009 As 70s sex symbols - Suzanne Somers and Loni Anderson (although Suzanne later in the late 90s or so turned out to be very hot for that age) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beerball Posted June 30, 2009 Share Posted June 30, 2009 (although Suzanne later in the late 90s or so turned out to be very hot for that age) well yeah, compared to Springsteen she was. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts