Jump to content

  •  


 
Photo

Manning has high praise for Caldwell


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
55 replies to this topic

#41 bayone

bayone

    bayone

  • Member
  • 7005 posts

Posted 14 December 2012 - 09:17 AM

I was confirming the statement, and provided the full statement in its full glory.

I also added.
"He said it, I think it was mostly in reference to Metzelares replacing Mudd and Christensen/Reich replacing Moore/Christensen, but like southwest said Caldwell was the one in charge at that point."


As southwest said, Manning didn't mention Cladwell, Metzelares, Reich or Christensen or anyone by name, but it's not hard to read between the lines that he wasn't happy with the whole situation, the whole organization and the communication that they were providing. I'd compare it to his "walking on eggshells" comment before he was cut and told his services were no longer needed. It's easy to read between the lines that he wasn't happy with the communication.

I didn't view southwest's comments as him insinuating Manning threw Caldwell under the bus in May, before the Super Bowl, after any of the number of mistakes Caldwell could easily be called out on, or in 2012 when both are with other teams. He was simply pointing out a quote where Manning communicated with the media his dissatisfaction with something in the franchise.


agree

, also though, lets face it who doesnt remember Peyton throwing up his arms in disgust at some TO calls, etc, however I feel that was HC duties maybe not OC, caldwell says he will rely on all the people around him & I bet HC will make some calls


Jim Caldwell plans to bring pace and collaboration to Ravens offense
New coordinator says he'll lean on other coaches as he calls plays for the first time in the NFL

GOOD 2 page article with video , he sounds confident in video

http://www.baltimore...0,7911384.story
Forgive any typos, try to catch, but have multiple progressive disabilities

Game Rewind: Relive every NFL moment…subscribe to Game Rewind.

#42 Superman

Superman
  • Forum Moderator
  • 13182 posts

Posted 14 December 2012 - 01:33 PM

With all due respect Superman, I know exactly what I said. ""There isn't a lot of coaching going on right now. I can assure you of that." To be fair, Peyton was not signaling out any person specifically by name alone, but he was clearly upset over a lack of guidance and instruction on the offensive side of the ball. Caldwell naturally as HC and previously QBs Coach bears some culpability, fault, & blameworthiness for the team’s lack of production at the start of the 2009 season."

Please do NOT attempt to put words in my mouth, or claim that I said or imply that I said, something that I clearly did not say. Thank you. I know exactly what I said & I was very precise & clear. If you want to disagree with my point of view, fine that is your prerogative. However, the only people who can speak with authority on this manner are Jim Caldwell, Jim Irsay, Peyton Manning, & Bill Polian.

Sorry, but that's not the case. Here's what you said:
I always remember what #18 said to reporters at the start of the Colts 2nd SB appearance in 2009: "There isn't a lot of coaching going on right now. I can assure you of that."

Who was HC in 2009 again? Ah yes, Jim Caldwell. Enough said...

If you didn't mean that Manning said this right before the Super Bowl, your wording is confusing.

More than that, Manning's comment had NOTHING to do with Jim Caldwell. The season hadn't even started yet. His comment was specific to the Moore and Mudd situation, and it was specifically about their role and the way they were being replaced at the time. As FJC's post containing the exact quotes shows, your recollection of Manning's comment is slightly off. He didn't use the words you're saying he did, and he didn't mean what you're suggesting he meant.

Also, I'm not sure what lack of production you're referring to in 2009. Not only did we start 14-0, we averaged 27 points/game before the Week 6 bye. We had one low scoring game against Jacksonville in the opener, but other than that, the offense was fine. All of our struggles early in the season came on the defensive side of the ball (like the Miami game, but the offense was razor sharp).

I'm not trying to call you out. I'm just saying that I think you're misquoting Manning and taking his comment out of context, and in doing so, you're twisting it to mean something it absolutely did not mean.
LET'S HUNT

#43 HireBruceArians

HireBruceArians
  • Member
  • 1502 posts

Posted 14 December 2012 - 07:31 PM

I'm not trying to call you out. I'm just saying that I think you're misquoting Manning and taking his comment out of context, and in doing so, you're twisting it to mean something it absolutely did not mean.

 

 

My stance, exactly



#44 supremecoltsfan300

supremecoltsfan300
  • Member
  • 1030 posts

Posted 14 December 2012 - 09:48 PM

I don't know exactly what you can draw from peyton's 09 coaching comments but it certainly wasnt an endorsement for anyone on that coaching staff including hc Caldwell. His new comments on him certainly suggest that he does not have confidence in Caldwell's abilities as an OC and to call plays. Peyton skirted around that question quite well, as we would expect from him, since he would never make disparaging remarks against anyone he knew (except * kickers).
"You can put in whatever piece you want with 18, 18 will make it work; all he says is just find your way open, I'll get the ball there. And that's where the Reggie Wayne's, the Dallas Clark's, the Marvin Harrison's; that's how dominant he is. If you take him out of the game, no disrespect to nobody else on the Colts, but you make them a very below-average ball club." -- Ray Lewis on Peyton Manning

#45 Tsarquise

Tsarquise
  • Member
  • 336 posts

Posted 14 December 2012 - 10:08 PM

What exactly made Caldwell so bad? How do you judge a head coach. Do any of you really know what on behind the scenes?

We went to a super bowl under Jim Caldwell. What makes Dungy so much better? They felt the same to me.

For some reason Dungy gets love but Caldwell gets hate.

And as far as Manning avoiding the question, maybe its because he didnt want to disrespect cam cameron. And it's not like he can endorse Caldwell being a OC when he was never OC during his tine with Colts.

I didn't really like Caldwell, but sone of the hate for this guy is unwarranted. I really don't understand.

I mean Tony Dungy only made it to one super bowl with Manning. The teams dungy had were also better than the ones caldwell had by far! Yet Dungy is praised... and Caldwell.... shamed...

#46 Superman

Superman
  • Forum Moderator
  • 13182 posts

Posted 15 December 2012 - 04:21 PM

I don't know exactly what you can draw from peyton's 09 coaching comments but it certainly wasnt an endorsement for anyone on that coaching staff including hc Caldwell. His new comments on him certainly suggest that he does not have confidence in Caldwell's abilities as an OC and to call plays. Peyton skirted around that question quite well, as we would expect from him, since he would never make disparaging remarks against anyone he knew (except * kickers).

The comment didn't pertain to the quality of the coaching. It was specific to the Moore and Mudd situation. So no, it wasn't an endorsement of anyone, including Caldwell. But it also wasn't related.

I agree that his new comments don't exactly sound enthusiastic about Caldwell as a play caller. Manning went out of his way to avoid commenting on that aspect.
LET'S HUNT

#47 southwest1

southwest1
  • Member
  • 11961 posts

Posted 15 December 2012 - 08:38 PM

Sorry, but that's not the case. Here's what you said:
If you didn't mean that Manning said this right before the Super Bowl, your wording is confusing.

More than that, Manning's comment had NOTHING to do with Jim Caldwell. The season hadn't even started yet. His comment was specific to the Moore and Mudd situation, and it was specifically about their role and the way they were being replaced at the time. As FJC's post containing the exact quotes shows, your recollection of Manning's comment is slightly off. He didn't use the words you're saying he did, and he didn't mean what you're suggesting he meant.

Also, I'm not sure what lack of production you're referring to in 2009. Not only did we start 14-0, we averaged 27 points/game before the Week 6 bye. We had one low scoring game against Jacksonville in the opener, but other than that, the offense was fine. All of our struggles early in the season came on the defensive side of the ball (like the Miami game, but the offense was razor sharp).

I'm not trying to call you out. I'm just saying that I think you're misquoting Manning and taking his comment out of context, and in doing so, you're twisting it to mean something it absolutely did not mean.

My wording was not confusing at all Superman. It was right on point. Jim Caldwell was HC at the time in 2009 a member of the coaching staff of the Indianapolis Colts along with Howard Mudd & other staff members. Did I say that Caldwell alone was singlehandedly responsible for the shortcoming of the team after #18 because sidelined with a season ending injury? No, I did not. 

 

I like you Superman, but I do not prefer being taken out of context when I was in no way, shape, or form ambiguous. I have lawyers, doctors, and professors in my family who understand logic well & who know how to frame an argument. If you failed to follow the bread crumbs, that's really not my problem.


"Invincibility lies in the defense; the possibility of victory in the attack." Sun Tzu

#48 southwest1

southwest1
  • Member
  • 11961 posts

Posted 16 December 2012 - 01:43 AM

First of all, did I attack Jim Caldwell's character? Did I say anything derogatory about his family, his personality, or his own private life? That's a no on all counts

Whether or not you attacked his character is up for debate. To me, when you come into a thread that originally highlighted a positive quote from Peyton Manning giving praise to Jim Caldwell, and post puppet pictures, question his intelligence, and FALSELY assert that Peyton took a verbal shot at Caldwell before the superbowl in 09', I'd qualify that as mudslinging and attacking one's character. If you want to word pinch, then no, you did not literally say that you 'hate' Jim Caldwell as a person, but your disdain for his tenure here certainly translated.

 

Distain really, you can read my thoughts now? The puppet reference merely means that Jim Caldwell was being controlled by Bill Polian, it has nothing to do with attacking or diminishing Caldwell's intelligence sir. If anything the situation generates sympathy for Caldwell not contempt or disgust sir. How can anyone have disdain for a man who wasn't calling the shots in the front office? If you had properly interpreted the situation, you'd see that my puppet symbolism is more of a negative observation on Bill Polian's management style than anything else.  I"d be careful with those sweeping generalizations there. 

Hate: “To abhor someone or something on an almost visceral level. To express intense animosity and hostility for something on an irrational level almost to the point of sheer contempt, condemnation, and revulsion.” The implication being that a person’s conclusions are without merit and not grounded in fact.

I am fully aware of the definition of the word, thank you.

 

The reason I included the definition was to show all bloggers on this site that the word "hate" has come to be applied way too broadly for a large number of people who seem to have more than a little difficulty maintaing balance and objectivity. Critical analysis both positive and negative is not synonymous with hate. 

I have said nothing unfounded or inflammatory about him as an individual. I merely pointed out are more that 1 occasion going all the way back to entries on Colts.com that Caldwell seemed to have some difficulty making game time adjustments in a quicker pace regarding making on field changes that's all. Where is this hate you speak of? And your beating a dead horse cartoon implies that I am pulling up an incident that occurred over a decade ago...We are only taking from 2009-2012 a duration of 3 years here. Hardly "beating a dead horse" ahf321.

Caldwell's failures here as a head coach, and the colts community's general disapproval of him (myself included), is already well documented on these forums. To come in here and further state the obvious is beyond redundant at this point, and the definition of 'beating a dead horse'

 

What specifically qualifies you to tell anyone that they are being redundant exactly? Considering that you completely missed the entire harbor on my puppet analogy, I don't think you are in a position to classify anyone as superfluous. Not a personal attack against you sir. Just an observation.

I even commented "Will I keep an open mind & allow him to improve in this area? Okay sure." Does that sound like irrational hate filled speech to you? Hmmm..

This is after I already called you out for your initial post. You have been more controlled in your replies since, I do admit. It still doesn't change the fact that you were off-base in your assumption that Manning was calling out Caldwell in his quote that you referenced.

 

Where in the world did you pull that piece of utter nonsense sir? Did I say that Manning specifically said "Jim Caldwell alone is singlehandedly responsible for the Colts lack of guidance & coaching in 2009?" No, but as HC, Caldwell was an integral part of the coaching staff then was he not? And, by that same token, Caldwell bears some responsibility for the team's shortcomings & failures that year does he not? 

"but it's fruitless (and pretty mean-spirited) to rag on the guy when he's no longer associated with the organization you root for." So, by that line of reasoning, if anyone moves to a different zip code, job, or organization we can never evaluate or critique a former colleague, co-worker, or employee? Strange... :scratch: :dunno:

As I said, Caldwell is gone. Everything that could be said about his tenure here as a head coach has already been said. You won't find many that will disagree with you that he was a poor head coach. What does that have to do with his abilities as a coordinator, or Manning's opinion of him as a coach and friend? You bring up the fact that he was horrible at making adjustments. Yep, we got that. Preaching to the choir......

 

Thank you for understanding that. I appreciate that.

Look, everyone is entitled to their own opinion and yes anyone is free to disagree with me, but they are not entitled to claim that people who are evaluating a former OC & HC's tenure in Indianapolis are being petty & overcome with hate. Sorry ahf321, but your argument, not you personally, is incredibly flawed and weak on it's face.

My only argument is, it is in poor taste to take someone's quotes out of context and use it to slander the work of another man. Caldwell's failure as a coach spoke for itself. No need to twist another man's words to further demonstrate his failures.

 

Again, considering that you completely misinterpreted my puppet analogy, you are in no position to tie any motives negative or otherwise to what I said regarding Mr. Caldwell. With all due respect sir, Caldwell was on the 2009 staff no one can exonerate him completely from what Peyton Manning said. Facts are facts sir. 

 




And superman was absolutely correct in what he said. Your original post I responded to did come off as if you were saying Peyton threw Caldwell under the bus before the superbowl:

 

Ah No, Superman was not absolutely correct in what he said & neither are you. Taking someone's words out of context does not qualify as empirical evidence of anything except rampant conjecture & speculation. 
 

I always remember what #18 said to reporters at the start of the Colts 2nd SB appearance in 2009: "There isn't a lot of coaching going on right now. I can assure you of that."


Whether or not that was your intent, is another issue entirely. The fact still remains that it was poorly worded and left itself open to scrutiny. Hence, my original response
I like you as a smart & usually insightful blogger sir & I will continue to read you blog posts with keen interests & enthusiasm. Clearly, we had a breakdown in communication here. Just try not to attach sweeping generalizations to what I actually said. Thank you. Have a nice evening. 

Thank you for sharing your perspective. It is immensely appreciated. Have a pleasant evening sir.

Likewise, sir
 
 
 

 

See The Bolded Blue Ink Responses ABOVE...


"Invincibility lies in the defense; the possibility of victory in the attack." Sun Tzu

#49 Moose Of Woe

Moose Of Woe
  • Member
  • 2078 posts

Posted 16 December 2012 - 02:21 PM

I have high praise for Caldwell. I love it when he's calling the shots on the opposing team.

#50 HireBruceArians

HireBruceArians
  • Member
  • 1502 posts

Posted 17 December 2012 - 09:27 AM

Distain really, you can read my thoughts now? The puppet reference merely means that Jim Caldwell was being controlled by Bill Polian, it has nothing to do with attacking or diminishing Caldwell's intelligence sir. If anything the situation generates sympathy for Caldwell not contempt or disgust sir. How can anyone have disdain for a man who wasn't calling the shots in the front office? If you had properly interpreted the situation, you'd see that my puppet symbolism is more of a negative observation on Bill Polian's management style than anything else.  I"d be careful with those sweeping generalizations there. 

 

To the point about you questioning his intelligence, I was actually referring to your first post where you said, "Where in that statement does a 4 time MVP & SB Champion discuss, let alone touch on Mr. Caldwell's intelligence, aptitude, or skills as an OC? Not a ringing endorsement IMO."

 

Because Peyton did not go into full disclosure about his feelings on Caldwell as a coach does not automatically make that an omission on his part, and certainly doesn't stand as evidence that he isn't fully confident in Caldwell as a play-caller. I think Peyton was very clear in pointing out that he has a relationship with Caldwell AND Cameron, and didn't want to offend either by speculating on the situation. 

 

As for the puppet post... I, for one, certainly wouldn't want to be compared to a puppet (and I suspect you wouldn't either) Regardless of who you considered that comparison to be an indictment of (Polian or Caldwell), calling anyone a puppet has more of a negative connotation associated to the puppet, not the puppeteer.    

 

The reason I included the definition was to show all bloggers on this site that the word "hate" has come to be applied way too broadly for a large number of people who seem to have more than a little difficulty maintaing balance and objectivity. Critical analysis both positive and negative is not synonymous with hate. 

 

Ok, so a poor choice of words on my end....... So can we stop fighting strawmen and get back to the original point now? (i.e. you taking Peyton's quote completely out of context)

 

 

What specifically qualifies you to tell anyone that they are being redundant exactly? Considering that you completely missed the entire harbor on my puppet analogy, I don't think you are in a position to classify anyone as superfluous. Not a personal attack against you sir. Just an observation.

 

What qualifies me? I didn't know a needed a certificate to make an observation now. How would I go about acquiring such a thing? If that's the case, I would certainly like to know what, exactly, qualifies YOU to speak on behalf of another man, and twist his words based off what you interpreted?... 

 

 

Where in the world did you pull that piece of utter nonsense sir? Did I say that Manning specifically said "Jim Caldwell alone is singlehandedly responsible for the Colts lack of guidance & coaching in 2009?" No, but as HC, Caldwell was an integral part of the coaching staff then was he not? And, by that same token, Caldwell bears some responsibility for the team's shortcomings & failures that year does he not? 

 

They won 14 games in a row and went to the superbowl that season. You'd be better served to base your argument around last season, than you are 09. I really don't understand the point you're trying to make here. Peyton Manning's quote was specific to Tom Moore and Howard Mudd's contract situation and the uncertainty around it. Read the whole article again. It's pretty clear that's what he was talking about. If you want to play super sleuth and try and connect the dots, that's your prerogative. However, as you phrased it earlier, "What specifically qualifies you to do that?"  

 

 

Again, considering that you completely misinterpreted my puppet analogy, you are in no position to tie any motives negative or otherwise to what I said regarding Mr. Caldwell. With all due respect sir, Caldwell was on the 2009 staff no one can exonerate him completely from what Peyton Manning said. Facts are facts sir. 

 

As you said earlier. The only one who can speak with authority on this matter is Peyton himself. It is a bit presumptuous of you to think that you can add or subtract from anything Peyton said in that quote. Facts are indeed facts, and I fail to see any evidence from Peyton's quote that serves as an indictment against Caldwell. Yes, Caldwell was the head coach, but Peyton was speaking specifically to the difference in communication between Moore/Mudd and Reich/Metzelares. If YOU want to say that Caldwell bares responsibility, that's one thing. But that is not what Peyton said or suggested.  And to the bigger point, which I ignored at first, that quote is still COMPLETELY irrelevant to the discussion of Caldwell being the coordinator of the Ravens now. Yet, you tried to tie 2 completely isolated instances to each other to somehow prove Caldwell isn't up to the task of being a coordinator. You can't dance around this....

 

Ah No, Superman was not absolutely correct in what he said & neither are you. Taking someone's words out of context does not qualify as empirical evidence of anything except rampant conjecture & speculation. 

 

Oh, the irony

 

 

I like you as a smart & usually insightful blogger sir & I will continue to read you blog posts with keen interests & enthusiasm. Clearly, we had a breakdown in communication here. Just try not to attach sweeping generalizations to what I actually said. Thank you. Have a nice evening. 

 

There may have been a breakdown in communication along the way, but I did not generalize anything. You said what you said, and (just my opinion) are doing a little bit of back tracking right now. I still enjoy you as a poster and hold no ill-will towards you. Paraphrasing and/or misinterpreting quotes to serve an agenda is still bad form, however



#51 Superman

Superman
  • Forum Moderator
  • 13182 posts

Posted 17 December 2012 - 05:31 PM

My wording was not confusing at all Superman. It was right on point. Jim Caldwell was HC at the time in 2009 a member of the coaching staff of the Indianapolis Colts along with Howard Mudd & other staff members. Did I say that Caldwell alone was singlehandedly responsible for the shortcoming of the team after #18 because sidelined with a season ending injury? No, I did not. 

 

I like you Superman, but I do not prefer being taken out of context when I was in no way, shape, or form ambiguous. I have lawyers, doctors, and professors in my family who understand logic well & who know how to frame an argument. If you failed to follow the bread crumbs, that's really not my problem.

 

1) To the bolded, did I ever infer that you said that? I did not. I don't see how that has anything to do with the topic.

 

2) It's ironic to me that you're taking umbrage at being taken out of context, when that seems to be exactly what you're doing with Manning's comments.

 

3) I am not the only one who thinks your initial comment was confusing, if not misleading. Your bread crumbs aren't falling where you think they are.

 

4) I have lawyers, doctors and professors in my family also. I don't know what they have to do with this discussion either.

 

We don't have a problem; I like you, too. But we disagree. I don't think Manning meant anything near what you're suggesting he did. I think you're taking his comments out of context. Manning's comment was specific to the Moore / Mudd situation, and had nothing to do with Caldwell.

 

Your original comment read as if this is something Manning said before the Super Bowl, when he said it during OTAs in May. I obviously misunderstood what you were saying, but your comment was confusing to begin with.

 

 On top of that, you misquoted him in the original comment. FJC posted the transcripts.

 

This is not a big deal; I'm not in love with Jim Caldwell. If anything was proven in 2011, it's that there wasn't a whole lot of coaching going on. What little there was proved to be disastrous. But I think it's pretty clear that Manning wasn't saying what you're suggesting he was saying.


LET'S HUNT

#52 southwest1

southwest1
  • Member
  • 11961 posts

Posted 17 December 2012 - 06:07 PM

Distain really, you can read my thoughts now? The puppet reference merely means that Jim Caldwell was being controlled by Bill Polian, it has nothing to do with attacking or diminishing Caldwell's intelligence sir. If anything the situation generates sympathy for Caldwell not contempt or disgust sir. How can anyone have disdain for a man who wasn't calling the shots in the front office? If you had properly interpreted the situation, you'd see that my puppet symbolism is more of a negative observation on Bill Polian's management style than anything else.  I"d be careful with those sweeping generalizations there. 

 

To the point about you questioning his intelligence, I was actually referring to your first post where you said, "Where in that statement does a 4 time MVP & SB Champion discuss, let alone touch on Mr. Caldwell's intelligence, aptitude, or skills as an OC? Not a ringing endorsement IMO."

 

Because Peyton did not go into full disclosure about his feelings on Caldwell as a coach does not automatically make that an omission on his part, and certainly doesn't stand as evidence that he isn't fully confident in Caldwell as a play-caller. I think Peyton was very clear in pointing out that he has a relationship with Caldwell AND Cameron, and didn't want to offend either by speculating on the situation. 

 

As for the puppet post... I, for one, certainly wouldn't want to be compared to a puppet (and I suspect you wouldn't either) Regardless of who you considered that comparison to be an indictment of (Polian or Caldwell), calling anyone a puppet has more of a negative connotation associated to the puppet, not the puppeteer.    

 

The reason I included the definition was to show all bloggers on this site that the word "hate" has come to be applied way too broadly for a large number of people who seem to have more than a little difficulty maintaing balance and objectivity. Critical analysis both positive and negative is not synonymous with hate. 

 

Ok, so a poor choice of words on my end....... So can we stop fighting strawmen and get back to the original point now? (i.e. you taking Peyton's quote completely out of context)

 

 

What specifically qualifies you to tell anyone that they are being redundant exactly? Considering that you completely missed the entire harbor on my puppet analogy, I don't think you are in a position to classify anyone as superfluous. Not a personal attack against you sir. Just an observation.

 

What qualifies me? I didn't know a needed a certificate to make an observation now. How would I go about acquiring such a thing? If that's the case, I would certainly like to know what, exactly, qualifies YOU to speak on behalf of another man, and twist his words based off what you interpreted?... 

 

 

Where in the world did you pull that piece of utter nonsense sir? Did I say that Manning specifically said "Jim Caldwell alone is singlehandedly responsible for the Colts lack of guidance & coaching in 2009?" No, but as HC, Caldwell was an integral part of the coaching staff then was he not? And, by that same token, Caldwell bears some responsibility for the team's shortcomings & failures that year does he not? 

 

They won 14 games in a row and went to the superbowl that season. You'd be better served to base your argument around last season, than you are 09. I really don't understand the point you're trying to make here. Peyton Manning's quote was specific to Tom Moore and Howard Mudd's contract situation and the uncertainty around it. Read the whole article again. It's pretty clear that's what he was talking about. If you want to play super sleuth and try and connect the dots, that's your prerogative. However, as you phrased it earlier, "What specifically qualifies you to do that?"  

 

 

Again, considering that you completely misinterpreted my puppet analogy, you are in no position to tie any motives negative or otherwise to what I said regarding Mr. Caldwell. With all due respect sir, Caldwell was on the 2009 staff no one can exonerate him completely from what Peyton Manning said. Facts are facts sir. 

 

As you said earlier. The only one who can speak with authority on this matter is Peyton himself. It is a bit presumptuous of you to think that you can add or subtract from anything Peyton said in that quote. Facts are indeed facts, and I fail to see any evidence from Peyton's quote that serves as an indictment against Caldwell. Yes, Caldwell was the head coach, but Peyton was speaking specifically to the difference in communication between Moore/Mudd and Reich/Metzelares. If YOU want to say that Caldwell bares responsibility, that's one thing. But that is not what Peyton said or suggested.  And to the bigger point, which I ignored at first, that quote is still COMPLETELY irrelevant to the discussion of Caldwell being the coordinator of the Ravens now. Yet, you tried to tie 2 completely isolated instances to each other to somehow prove Caldwell isn't up to the task of being a coordinator. You can't dance around this....

 

Ah No, Superman was not absolutely correct in what he said & neither are you. Taking someone's words out of context does not qualify as empirical evidence of anything except rampant conjecture & speculation. 

 

Oh, the irony

 

 

I like you as a smart & usually insightful blogger sir & I will continue to read you blog posts with keen interests & enthusiasm. Clearly, we had a breakdown in communication here. Just try not to attach sweeping generalizations to what I actually said. Thank you. Have a nice evening. 

 

There may have been a breakdown in communication along the way, but I did not generalize anything. You said what you said, and (just my opinion) are doing a little bit of back tracking right now. I still enjoy you as a poster and hold no ill-will towards you. Paraphrasing and/or misinterpreting quotes to serve an agenda is still bad form, however

Clearly, we will never see eye to eye on the Caldwell issue and that is fine. I could say more, but it would be frivolous at this juncture. I look forward to reading more of your posts ahf321.  :thmup:


"Invincibility lies in the defense; the possibility of victory in the attack." Sun Tzu

#53 southwest1

southwest1
  • Member
  • 11961 posts

Posted 17 December 2012 - 06:16 PM

1) To the bolded, did I ever infer that you said that? I did not. I don't see how that has anything to do with the topic.

 

2) It's ironic to me that you're taking umbrage at being taken out of context, when that seems to be exactly what you're doing with Manning's comments.

 

3) I am not the only one who thinks your initial comment was confusing, if not misleading. Your bread crumbs aren't falling where you think they are.

 

4) I have lawyers, doctors and professors in my family also. I don't know what they have to do with this discussion either.

 

We don't have a problem; I like you, too. But we disagree. I don't think Manning meant anything near what you're suggesting he did. I think you're taking his comments out of context. Manning's comment was specific to the Moore / Mudd situation, and had nothing to do with Caldwell.

 

Your original comment read as if this is something Manning said before the Super Bowl, when he said it during OTAs in May. I obviously misunderstood what you were saying, but your comment was confusing to begin with.

 

 On top of that, you misquoted him in the original comment. FJC posted the transcripts.

 

This is not a big deal; I'm not in love with Jim Caldwell. If anything was proven in 2011, it's that there wasn't a whole lot of coaching going on. What little there was proved to be disastrous. But I think it's pretty clear that Manning wasn't saying what you're suggesting he was saying.

Are we in a court of law now? I didn't realize that I was under oath. 2 people does not qualify as a uniform consensus on taking something out of context. Fine, we disagree about the significance of Peyton's Manning's original statement and what level of intent to apply to it. I respect you as a smart individual and I will continue to read your posts with great enthusiasm. Have a nice day Superman.  :thmup:


"Invincibility lies in the defense; the possibility of victory in the attack." Sun Tzu

#54 Superman

Superman
  • Forum Moderator
  • 13182 posts

Posted 17 December 2012 - 06:30 PM

Are we in a court of law now? I didn't realize that I was under oath. 2 people does not qualify as a uniform consensus on taking something out of context. Fine, we disagree about the significance of Peyton's Manning's original statement and what level of intent to apply to it. I respect you as a smart individual and I will continue to read your posts with great enthusiasm. Have a nice day Superman.  :thmup:

I didn't say there was a uniform consensus on your comment. I just said I'm not the only one that misunderstood what you originally meant. Maybe that initial comment you posted wasn't confusing to you; I'm sure you knew exactly what you were trying to say. But it didn't come across that way to me. And that particular obtuseness is not unique to me, as someone else also misunderstood you. Like I said, it was confusing.

 

To the rest, cool beans.


LET'S HUNT

#55 southwest1

southwest1
  • Member
  • 11961 posts

Posted 17 December 2012 - 06:46 PM

I didn't say there was a uniform consensus on your comment. I just said I'm not the only one that misunderstood what you originally meant. Maybe that initial comment you posted wasn't confusing to you; I'm sure you knew exactly what you were trying to say. But it didn't come across that way to me. And that particular obtuseness is not unique to me, as someone else also misunderstood you. Like I said, it was confusing.

 

To the rest, cool beans.

Okay, if I made a mistake, I made a mistake. My apologies to both you Superman & Ah321. If I miscommunicated something, that's not your fault. Good luck Mr. Caldwell in Baltimore. It's water under the bridge now. No harm done. Time to start over & hit the reset button with both of you. I don't hold grudges either. Thank you both for understanding. It is immensely appreciated.  :D


"Invincibility lies in the defense; the possibility of victory in the attack." Sun Tzu

#56 HireBruceArians

HireBruceArians
  • Member
  • 1502 posts

Posted 18 December 2012 - 06:02 AM

Okay, if I made a mistake, I made a mistake. My apologies to both you Superman & Ah321. If I miscommunicated something, that's not your fault. Good luck Mr. Caldwell in Baltimore. It's water under the bridge now. No harm done. Time to start over & hit the reset button with both of you. I don't hold grudges either. Thank you both for understanding. It is immensely appreciated.  :D

 

 

No need for apologies, friend. I understand you better now, and hopefully you me. See ya around!








COLTS TICKETS!

Join the Season Ticket Wait List!

Sign up today
Game Rewind: Indianapolis Colts

Recent Status Updates

  • Photo
      24 Apr
    MOB

    Opening against the Broncos. Maybe this is a sign of destiny?

    Show comments (3)
View All Updates