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