E-Griz Hypocrisy - Basketball vs Football

[ordigger]

“I won't insult your intelligence by suggesting that you really believe what you just said.”
― William F. Buckley Jr.

“And what sort of lives do these people, who pose as being moral, lead themselves? My dear fellow, you forget that we are in the native land of the hypocrite.”
― Oscar Wilde, The Picture of Dorian Gray

“Often those that criticise others reveal what he himself lacks.”
― Shannon L. Alder

So...you post an argument that is flawed.

I post contesting your post with logic and evidence.

You reply with 3 different quotes, which have no relation to your flawed argument, that mildly suggest that if someone criticizes you that the person doing the criticism is flawed...which is actually a sort of paradox...if you know what that means...

I'm sorry you do not know the definition of hypocrisy and wanted to debate the translation of a word based on no argument what-so-ever.

Again.

1. I understand your point fully. I do not agree with it but I understand it.

2. It is NOT hypocrisy, no matter how you try to spin it.

3. Football coaching/recruiting and basketball coaching/recruiting are COMPLETELY different no matter WHERE you are. I can go into WAY more detail but anyone with a brain should understand this. Our football program and basketball program are also in COMPLETELY different situations. One program is coming off one of the worst 3-4 year stretches ever while another has enjoyed quite a bit of success over the past few years.

1. Obviously you don't understand what the word means. I get that.

2. You logic is flawed, better yet you supply no logic or even evidence.

3. You missed the point of the entire post.

4. The only spin I see is you ducking the definition of the word. I even provided a definition verbatim, with an example of that definition.

5. You've posted a couple of times you were going to quit arguing, yet you continue. I sense something here.

6. I guarantee I'm smarter than you.

7. If you can't understand that its one topic IN GENERAL, then truly there is no hope for mankind or you.

8. If you don't understand how those quotes fit here, then truly there is no point for you to continue.

9. The martians are coming.

10. You've said a number of times its not the right word, yet amazingly you've supplied no other word. Why? Because your logic is flawed....oh wait I said that.

Edit:

11. I sense I'm trying to explain logic with a woman which is impossible.

1. You're arguing the definition of a word with someone who got a degree in English. This is the webster dictionary definition - the behavior of people who do things that they tell other people not to do : behavior that does not agree with what someone claims to believe or feel.
There is no BEHAVIOR by anyone that contradicts a belief. THAT is logic that you are just choosing to ignore.

2. I provided a better analysis and logic to contradict your point than you have provided to prove yours. You have yet to try and counter the CLEAR point that the two programs are extremely different.

3. I got the point of the entire post. I disagree with you over it.

4. You didn't provide a definition, you provided your misguided belief on what the word meant. I provided a definition, which proved you wrong.

5. Just trying to prove a point to someone who clearly does NOT understand the language that he speaks.

6. I GUARANTEE you are not anywhere close to as smart as me or anywhere close to the IQ level I have.

7. You have two references in your one topic. Your two references split your topic into two because the references are not nearly as related as you suggest.

8. Your quotes are misguided attempts for you to rebuke my argument without using logic. Something that traditionally women do over men but is simply not the case in this argument.

9. I have stated I don't know the right word and that I believe a word DOES exist but Hypocrisy is not the right word. Just because what you are saying does not have a current label doesn't mean you just throw it onto another word claiming that's a clear representation when it strictly refutes the accepted definition of the word. There are many things that currently do not have an English word but are simple concepts. The word "Ihr" in German is the one that comes to mind which is you in plural. The closest version of that in English is "ya'll" which is not really a word.

P.S. ^ That is logic. Not the shit you are spewing.

10. This "woman" has better degrees than you, currently attends a better college than you have ever gone to, and likely has much more knowledge about the subject that is at hand.

Let's see..

1. English degree - lmao. BUT just to be nice I talked with a friend of mine tonight who has a graduate degree in English, plus a law degree. Gave her scenario, asked for one word...she gave me two. Hypocrisy & I won't mention the other one, because its not nice.

2. Obviously you've missed out on the fact that Engineering involves logic....lol. You're excused.

3. Point 6, I'm off the floor now from laughing. Let me guess, you make more money in one summer than I do in one year. Is it legal?

4. Considering one of your schools you went to is UM, I'm not worried about who has a degree from a better school. I'm very happy with what I have, and where I got them.

5. Women speak from emotion, not logic. Clearly the case here with you. You talk a good game, but at best that's what it is.

6.

hy·poc·ri·sy
noun \hi-ˈpä-krə-sē also hī-\

: the behavior of people who do things that they tell other people not to do : behavior that does not agree with what someone claims to believe or feel

hyp·o·crite
[hip-uh-krit]
noun
1.
a person who pretends to have virtues, moral or religious beliefs, principles, etc., that he or she does not actually possess, especially a person whose actions belie stated beliefs.
2.
a person who feigns some desirable or publicly approved attitude, especially one whose private life, opinions, or statements belie his or her public statements.

Now read slowly here....if you go on a public forum, and post one opinion about a process, and then criticize others for stating support for that same process/idealogy....you my dear are a HYPOCRITE; hypocrisy itself. Did you get that? I could care less if its football, basketball, lacrosse or dungeons and dragons.

6. You're still wrong.

7. Blocked you, because I should know that you can never win an argument with a woman, because even when they are wrong they will never admit it. Truly a waste of time to do so.

8. The martians came, met you and left. Way to go, scare them little buggers back home.

 

[Eriul]

So...you post an argument that is flawed.

I post contesting your post with logic and evidence.

You reply with 3 different quotes, which have no relation to your flawed argument, that mildly suggest that if someone criticizes you that the person doing the criticism is flawed...which is actually a sort of paradox...if you know what that means...

I'm sorry you do not know the definition of hypocrisy and wanted to debate the translation of a word based on no argument what-so-ever.

Again.

1. I understand your point fully. I do not agree with it but I understand it.

2. It is NOT hypocrisy, no matter how you try to spin it.

3. Football coaching/recruiting and basketball coaching/recruiting are COMPLETELY different no matter WHERE you are. I can go into WAY more detail but anyone with a brain should understand this. Our football program and basketball program are also in COMPLETELY different situations. One program is coming off one of the worst 3-4 year stretches ever while another has enjoyed quite a bit of success over the past few years.

1. Obviously you don't understand what the word means. I get that.

2. You logic is flawed, better yet you supply no logic or even evidence.

3. You missed the point of the entire post.

4. The only spin I see is you ducking the definition of the word. I even provided a definition verbatim, with an example of that definition.

5. You've posted a couple of times you were going to quit arguing, yet you continue. I sense something here.

6. I guarantee I'm smarter than you.

7. If you can't understand that its one topic IN GENERAL, then truly there is no hope for mankind or you.

8. If you don't understand how those quotes fit here, then truly there is no point for you to continue.

9. The martians are coming.

10. You've said a number of times its not the right word, yet amazingly you've supplied no other word. Why? Because your logic is flawed....oh wait I said that.

Edit:

11. I sense I'm trying to explain logic with a woman which is impossible.

1. You're arguing the definition of a word with someone who got a degree in English. This is the webster dictionary definition - the behavior of people who do things that they tell other people not to do : behavior that does not agree with what someone claims to believe or feel.
There is no BEHAVIOR by anyone that contradicts a belief. THAT is logic that you are just choosing to ignore.

2. I provided a better analysis and logic to contradict your point than you have provided to prove yours. You have yet to try and counter the CLEAR point that the two programs are extremely different.

3. I got the point of the entire post. I disagree with you over it.

4. You didn't provide a definition, you provided your misguided belief on what the word meant. I provided a definition, which proved you wrong.

5. Just trying to prove a point to someone who clearly does NOT understand the language that he speaks.

6. I GUARANTEE you are not anywhere close to as smart as me or anywhere close to the IQ level I have.

7. You have two references in your one topic. Your two references split your topic into two because the references are not nearly as related as you suggest.

8. Your quotes are misguided attempts for you to rebuke my argument without using logic. Something that traditionally women do over men but is simply not the case in this argument.

9. I have stated I don't know the right word and that I believe a word DOES exist but Hypocrisy is not the right word. Just because what you are saying does not have a current label doesn't mean you just throw it onto another word claiming that's a clear representation when it strictly refutes the accepted definition of the word. There are many things that currently do not have an English word but are simple concepts. The word "Ihr" in German is the one that comes to mind which is you in plural. The closest version of that in English is "ya'll" which is not really a word.

P.S. ^ That is logic. Not the shit you are spewing.

10. This "woman" has better degrees than you, currently attends a better college than you have ever gone to, and likely has much more knowledge about the subject that is at hand.

Let's see..

1. English degree - lmao. BUT just to be nice I talked with a friend of mine tonight who has a graduate degree in English, plus a law degree. Gave her scenario, asked for one word...she gave me two. Hypocrisy & I won't mention the other one, because its not nice.

2. Obviously you've missed out on the fact that Engineering involves logic....lol. You're excused.

3. Point 6, I'm off the floor now from laughing. Let me guess, you make more money in one summer than I do in one year. Is it legal?

4. Considering one of your schools you went to is UM, I'm not worried about who has a degree from a better school. I'm very happy with what I have, and where I got them.

5. Women speak from emotion, not logic. Clearly the case here with you. You talk a good game, but at best that's what it is.

6.

hy·poc·ri·sy
noun \hi-ˈpä-krə-sē also hī-\

: the behavior of people who do things that they tell other people not to do : behavior that does not agree with what someone claims to believe or feel

hyp·o·crite
[hip-uh-krit]
noun
1.
a person who pretends to have virtues, moral or religious beliefs, principles, etc., that he or she does not actually possess, especially a person whose actions belie stated beliefs.
2.
a person who feigns some desirable or publicly approved attitude, especially one whose private life, opinions, or statements belie his or her public statements.

Now read slowly here....if you go on a public forum, and post one opinion about a process, and then criticize others for stating support for that same process/idealogy....you my dear are a HYPOCRITE; hypocrisy itself. Did you get that? I could care less if its football, basketball, lacrosse or dungeons and dragons.

6. You're still wrong.

7. Blocked you, because I should know that you can never win an argument with a woman, because even when they are wrong they will never admit it. Truly a waste of time to do so.

8. The martians came, met you and left. Way to go, scare them little buggers back home.

1. because you're anonymous friend is more qualified than the Webster dictionary

2. I do not see you using engineering to prove a point to me.

3. Well I did make 6 figures one summer working for an alarm company. I am much younger than you and I am sure I will as most ivy graduates with MBA's do pretty well.

4. Don't worry 2 of my degrees are from UM. My other one will be from a much higher institution. P.S. UM isn't as horrible of a learning institution as is claimed around here. Maybe in the 90's but not so much now. I'm 3rd in my class at my ivy school with a "state school education." So I think UM did ok .

5. I talk a good game, but as AZGriz can attest I will back it up eagerly and maybe if you didn't possess chauvinist attitudes you would realize this argument doesn't have anything to do with gender.

6. You should read the definition you posted again. Read it slowly. Maybe read it aloud and take a breath during commas and periods. You might realize that your bolded part was not what you thought it was.

7. You apparently lost track on how to count because 7 comes after 6 not 6. Maybe you missed that day of school. Maybe it was the same day that they taught the difference between you're and your.

8. Sorry you still posted no logic to try and prove a point. Your only attempt was to post a definition which you clearly read wrong as showcased by your bold.

 

[PlayerRep]

I don't often agree with Digger, but he is largely right on this issue. It is inconsistent to argue national search/new blood for UM football and hire-the-connected-guy for UM basketball. Football and basketball at UM have many similarities, and there is nothing of importance to support that coaching search methodology should be treated completely different. I suppose some could view hypocritical as a bit of hyperbole, but that's often the way of the internet.

As I already posted somewhere, Haslam has said there will be a national search for the new hoops coach.

In this day and age, I think national search is largely silly because interested coaches nationally almost immediately know of head coach openings, make inquiries and throw their hats in the ring. I also believe that, at a school like UM, hiring someone with connections to the school or the region is often the best thing to do, but, of course, not always.

Can we please move on from this, and get back to watching Alpha blabber on, and having Cat posters and other idiots attack or pick at me.

 

[ordigger]

I don't often agree with Digger, but he is largely right on this issue. It is inconsistent to argue national search/new blood for UM football and hire-the-connected-guy for UM basketball. Football and basketball at UM have many similarities, and there is nothing of importance to support that coaching search methodology should be treated completely different. I suppose some could view hypocritical as a bit of hyperbole, but that's often the way of the internet.

As I already posted somewhere, Haslam has said there will be a national search for the new hoops coach.

In this day and age, I think national search is largely silly because interested coaches nationally almost immediately know of head coach openings, make inquiries and throw their hats in the ring. I also believe that, at a school like UM, hiring someone with connections to the school or the region is often the best thing to do, but, of course, not always.

Can we please move on from this, and get back to watching Alpha blabber on, and having Cat posters and other idiots attack or pick at me.

Would the national search be for legal reasons? I think I read that in Oregon they had to wait for the job to be posted 7 days before anything could be done in regard to the OSU hire. Also they were pretty firm on the fact you had to have at a minimum an undergrad degree. I think that eliminated some of the favorite candidates, ie Lester Connor early on.

 

[PlayerRep]

Doubt that a national search is required for legal reasons, but don't know. Assume that having a degree is merely a school policy. One of the reasons Tinkle didn't get the UM job when Krystko did, was because Tinkle didn't have his degree at the time.

 

[mtgrizrule]

I don't often agree with Digger, but he is largely right on this issue. It is inconsistent to argue national search/new blood for UM football and hire-the-connected-guy for UM basketball. Football and basketball at UM have many similarities, and there is nothing of importance to support that coaching search methodology should be treated completely different. I suppose some could view hypocritical as a bit of hyperbole, but that's often the way of the internet.

As I already posted somewhere, Haslam has said there will be a national search for the new hoops coach.

In this day and age, I think national search is largely silly because interested coaches nationally almost immediately know of head coach openings, make inquiries and throw their hats in the ring. I also believe that, at a school like UM, hiring someone with connections to the school or the region is often the best thing to do, but, of course, not always.

Can we please move on from this, and get back to watching Alpha blabber on, and having Cat posters and other idiots attack or pick at me.

Christ Sake, something is wrong! I finally agree with PR completely to the point where I'd buy him a beer for that post. This is kind of scary. Someone wake me up soon. :thumb: :lol:

 

[Eriul]

I don't often agree with Digger, but he is largely right on this issue. It is inconsistent to argue national search/new blood for UM football and hire-the-connected-guy for UM basketball. Football and basketball at UM have many similarities, and there is nothing of importance to support that coaching search methodology should be treated completely different. I suppose some could view hypocritical as a bit of hyperbole, but that's often the way of the internet.

As I already posted somewhere, Haslam has said there will be a national search for the new hoops coach.

In this day and age, I think national search is largely silly because interested coaches nationally almost immediately know of head coach openings, make inquiries and throw their hats in the ring. I also believe that, at a school like UM, hiring someone with connections to the school or the region is often the best thing to do, but, of course, not always.

Can we please move on from this, and get back to watching Alpha blabber on, and having Cat posters and other idiots attack or pick at me.

For the record I am not contending whether we should or should not do a national search. I am not as well versed in what exactly goes into coaching a basketball program and who we have as assistants. I find it important to not take an opinion on something that I am ignorant about.

I do believe however that the situations are different and it is likely that someone can be correct in wanting their coaches for those two different sports to be hired in different ways.

 

[PlayerRep]

I don't often agree with Digger, but he is largely right on this issue. It is inconsistent to argue national search/new blood for UM football and hire-the-connected-guy for UM basketball. Football and basketball at UM have many similarities, and there is nothing of importance to support that coaching search methodology should be treated completely different. I suppose some could view hypocritical as a bit of hyperbole, but that's often the way of the internet.

As I already posted somewhere, Haslam has said there will be a national search for the new hoops coach.

In this day and age, I think national search is largely silly because interested coaches nationally almost immediately know of head coach openings, make inquiries and throw their hats in the ring. I also believe that, at a school like UM, hiring someone with connections to the school or the region is often the best thing to do, but, of course, not always.

Can we please move on from this, and get back to watching Alpha blabber on, and having Cat posters and other idiots attack or pick at me.

For the record I am not contending whether we should or should not do a national search. I am not as well versed in what exactly goes into coaching a basketball program and who we have as assistants. I find it important to not take an opinion on something that I am ignorant about.

I do believe however that the situations are different and it is likely that someone can be correct in wanting their coaches for those two different sports to be hired in different ways.

Why didn't you say that in the first place? I wondered, when I saw your first post, if you were disagreeing with Digger mainly because you saw that I had agreed with him.

 

[ordigger]

I don't often agree with Digger, but he is largely right on this issue. It is inconsistent to argue national search/new blood for UM football and hire-the-connected-guy for UM basketball. Football and basketball at UM have many similarities, and there is nothing of importance to support that coaching search methodology should be treated completely different. I suppose some could view hypocritical as a bit of hyperbole, but that's often the way of the internet.

As I already posted somewhere, Haslam has said there will be a national search for the new hoops coach.

In this day and age, I think national search is largely silly because interested coaches nationally almost immediately know of head coach openings, make inquiries and throw their hats in the ring. I also believe that, at a school like UM, hiring someone with connections to the school or the region is often the best thing to do, but, of course, not always.

Can we please move on from this, and get back to watching Alpha blabber on, and having Cat posters and other idiots attack or pick at me.

For the record I am not contending whether we should or should not do a national search. I am not as well versed in what exactly goes into coaching a basketball program and who we have as assistants. I find it important to not take an opinion on something that I am ignorant about.

I do believe however that the situations are different and it is likely that someone can be correct in wanting their coaches for those two different sports to be hired in different ways.

Why didn't you say that in the first place? I wondered, when I saw your first post, if you were disagreeing with Digger mainly because you saw that I had agreed with him.

Good points both. I get the distinct impression you two know each other, perhaps even related.

 

[AllWeatherFan]

So, to summarize:

You're wrong. No I'm not. Yes you are. No I'm not. Are too. Am not.

 

[ordigger]

So, to summarize:

You're wrong. No I'm not. Yes you are. No I'm not. Are too. Am not.

No, you are wrong.