[FONT="][/FONT]
[FONT="]
[FONT="]
I fundamentally disagree with this article.
I agree with you. Going into the season I agreed with that thought process. The GA game proved that he was a critical member of that team.I fundamentally disagree with this article.
If the best reasoning the author can muster is that we would have been better off without Jalen in 2018 because Mac Jones performs well in A-Day games, he needs to re-examine his thesis.
A lot of writers have huge egos. Never understood why that is, but it's so pervasive that I've quit expending stomach acid on the question.I disagreed with the title, and his fundamental rai-son d'etre. It is to complected a subject to be done in one piece, by a legend in his own mind. I passed on several of his pieces during the season. I posted this piece, against my best judgement, but alas, 'tis the off season, and I succumbed, as the current Bama news is hard to find. But it did get some attention, which is somewhat unusual at this time of year in the Latest Bama News thread. I will continue to monitor his stuff, this barely made the cut. And BTW, I've got my eye on goodman, of al.com.
Is this the same guy who wrote Brian Burgdorf should replace Jay Barker?I fundamentally disagree with this article.
If the best reasoning the author can muster is that we would have been better off without Jalen in 2018 because Mac Jones performs well in A-Day games, he needs to re-examine his thesis.
Noted, with agreement. RTR!A lot of writers have huge egos. Never understood why that is, but it's so pervasive that I've quit expending stomach acid on the question.
Please don't quit posting links to opinions just because they aren't popular. The fact that a lot of people might not see things the author's way doesn't mean we don't want opposing views. Point being, while I didn't agree with the article, and thought it was poorly-reasoned, I appreciated the mental challenge. Reasoned discussion is the foundation of TF. If we get only the information we already agree with, we become an echo chamber like ITAT.
Regarding Goodman, I agree with you. He's beginning to remind me of a slightly less bombastic version of Dan LeBatard, Colin Cowherd and Joe Klatt. Just puts forward outlying positions for the initial hoo-rah, and relies on the gnat-like attention span of the general public. If events don't bear him out (which is most of the time), he knows they'll have forgotten pretty much anything he says. So he gets what is in his mind the best of both worlds -- attention without accountability.
But Lord help us if he ever gets one of those unfounded predictions right. He'll trumpet that from the highest mountaintop for all eternity. He makes Kevin Scarbinsky look measured and reasoned.
I've quit reading him, and life is that much more peaceful.