[PWNED]

Originally Posted by JoeRedskin

And it comments like that by these guys that piss me off. It is just intellectually dishonest. King, Pasta, Banks and the rest are entitled to their opinions but they try to pass those opinions off as being supported by making factually conclusive statements that are at, best, disengenous. In doing so, b/c others rely on these guys for the "facts", they perpetuate the anti-skin bias held by other talking heads and local medias. How many people did the research concerning the likelihood that the Skins would be signing 20-30 rookies if the CBA hadn't gone through? I believe it started w/ Pasta and got repeated by everyone else.

These guys are paid the big bucks - yet they can't follow simple analytical rules: Check the facts and conduct an analysis based on those facts then reach a conclusion (i.e. who did we sign, who did we cut, what role did those cut play, what role will those signed play, what was the stated reason for the cuts and signings, do the stated reasons match the factual backgrounds of the signings and cuts?). It's a lot of work but, hey, isn't that what they are supposed to be doing all day?

Instead we get these "blow up the roster" and "cutting Corey Raymer is significant" type of comments. I mean seriously, what could Pasta's basis be for saying we are blowing up the roster? Cutting Ramsey and Arrington? Two players who had almost no role in last year's playoff run and who's replacement has been debated for at least a year now? Replacing marginal starters with better players (Bowen, Clark - Archuletta)? Signing players who hopefully will upgrade a position that was obviously a need (Lloyd, R-El)?

Get the facts straight, conduct an analysis, support your conclusions. I thought those were the requirements for good analytical commentary. Apparently, I was wrong.

But That Guy is right - they won't shut up unless and until we start winning.

and see, this is where other fans get their opinions of our team.