Nominate your Candidates for the Colt’s Mt. Rushmore

[The Old Crow]

Back to topic. How about A.Q. Shipley for Mt. Rushmore !

[HarassedOffTheSite]

Please see below

 

Please see below

 

Please see below

 

Please see below

 

Please see below

 

Please see below

 

Please see below

 

Please see below.

 

Whew, lets see how clever I am. Let's take some quotes out of context, mix them up, put them together, and come up with a wrong conclusion. Sounds alot like the self-proclaimed, "The Move to Indianapolis- The True Story ."

 

You know what, I’m going to help you out. I have written the most accurate, best sourced contextual accounting of what happened regarding the Colts problems in Baltimore and their eventual move to Indianapolis. Better than Mike Chappell, better than Mike Devitt, better than Dave Anderson at the New York Times, and better than anything that has ever come out of the Baltimore Sun. The entire piece is unimpeachable from a factual and sourced standpoint. It would breeze through any editorial board’s (outside of Maryland) review.

 

You have railed against it, slandered the piece and me as well. However, you said in an earlier post “I may have to do my own version called, The Move to Indianapolis : The Rest of the Story.” So this is what I’ll do; by all means please do write your own meme. I challenge you to. Be sure to (like me) source everything. And we’ll let the above attached users stack the two up against one another and judge their veracity. And if you can actually “write” as good as you harangue, if you can support your perspective with credible references, then perhaps a combining of the two stories will then be called for.

 

For my part, I do not think you will be able to. Past continuing to slander Robert Irsay, imply some nefarious behavior on the part of the leaders of Indianapolis and completely glossing over the actions of the leaders of the city of Baltimore and state of Maryland, I don’t think you can actually write a credible, unemotional, fact-based, sourced rebuttal.

 

Do you accept the challenge?

 

[The Old Crow]

 

You know what, I’m going to help you out. I have written the most accurate, best sourced contextual accounting of what happened regarding the Colts problems in Baltimore and their eventual move to Indianapolis. Better than Mike Chappell, better than Mike Devitt, better than Dave Anderson at the New York Times, and better than anything that has ever come out of the Baltimore Sun. The entire piece is unimpeachable from a factual and sourced standpoint. It would breeze through any editorial board’s (outside of Maryland) review.

 

You have railed against it, slandered the piece and me as well. However, you said in an earlier post “I may have to do my own version called, The Move to Indianapolis : The Rest of the Story.” So this is what I’ll do; by all means please do write your own meme. I challenge you to. Be sure to (like me) source everything. And we’ll let the above attached users stack the two up against one another and judge their veracity. And if you can actually “write” as good as you harangue, if you can support your perspective with credible references, then perhaps a combining of the two stories will then be called for.

 

For my part, I do not think you will be able to. Past continuing to slander Robert Irsay, imply some nefarious behavior on the part of the leaders of Indianapolis and completely glossing over the actions of the leaders of the city of Baltimore and state of Maryland, I don’t think you can actually write a credible, unemotional, fact-based, sourced rebuttal.

 

Do you accept the challenge?

 

It may take awhile, but I'mm be glad to put something together to add to the knowledge of the move. I'm also glad you didn't communicate in sound bites, as I prefer this style better. I've read your piece, but will apply the fine-toothed comb to it. I'm not sure how you came to the assumption that I glossed over the actions of the Baltimore and Maryland politicians. I think I've admitted their culpability. However, you mention in your story Indy setting up a stadium, but fail to mention that they wanted to lure a team. You really have nothing in there about Bob Irsay's relationship with Baltimore, which is a huge part of the story. I challenge you to go on You Tube , and watch Irsay's Press Conference on ESPN's 30 for 30, about The Band that wouldn't die. I didn't slander Bob Irsay, his behavior slandered himself. You will also note Jim Irsay's reaction to his father.

Brian, there are two ways you can write a story. You can go in with an open mind, look at the total story, put all the facts in from both sides, and then come to a conclusion. The other way is to just look for facts that back up a pre-disposed assumption, and conclusion. I would challenge you to look more closely at Mr. Irsay's relationship as Colts' owner during this time frame. As a historian, you also have to go farther back into Baltimore Colt's history into why people reacted to Mr. Irsay the way they did.

If you just want to blame Baltimore, or myself as the so-called mouthpiece of all of Baltimore, I'm not sure I can change your mind. In a divorce, it takes two to tango. In a move like what happened in Baltimore there were three players, the Irsays, Baltimore, and Indianapolis. To have a total real story of the move to Indy, more detail is needed to gain a full understanding. That is what I've been trying to say.

[HarassedOffTheSite]

I'm not sure how you came to the assumption that I glossed over the actions of the Baltimore and Maryland politicians.

 

Because the move on March 28/29, 1984 was the direct result of their actions yet you've focused the bulk of your comments on Robert Irsay and his less than glowing personality. We've all heard this lazy, adolescently bitter canard ad nauseum when it comes to the move. His personality or lack thereof did not provoke the move. The attempt to steal the franchise via eminent domain laws did. And any narrative that does not focus there is a biased one. The politicians of Maryland and Baltimore were not culpable, they were responsible.

 

However, you mention in your story Indy setting up a stadium, but fail to mention that they wanted to lure a team.

 

Because it not germane. The leaders in Indianapolis made very good business decisions because they desired to "host" an NFL franchise. Not own and administrate one. The leader's in Baltimore behaved as if the city had some sort of rights where the franchise (a private business) was concerned. And they acted accordingly (attempting to take ownership outright)...and that is why Baltimore lost the team in less than 24 hours, not Robert Irsay's disposition and not the very smart moves made in Indianapolis. Irsay and Indianapolis facilitated the move but the leaders in Baltimore and Maryland are responsible for it happening when it did and the way it did. That is a fact that is simply irrefutable. And that is why it is the focus of my attention.    

 

You really have nothing in there about Bob Irsay's relationship with Baltimore, which is a huge part of the story.

 

And that is all that it is; a "part" of the story. Not the story. I understand that you and many other citizens of Baltimore & Maryland want to make Irsay the story. It is easier that way. Placing the responsibility on him instead of a transparent self-examination of not only the actions of your leaders but also of the consequences of those actions. This is why you find my blog entry disagreeable....and it is also why you are incorrect.

 

 

I challenge you to go on You Tube , and watch Irsay's Press Conference on ESPN's 30 for 30, about The Band that wouldn't die.

 

Again, everyone is aware of the narrative vis-a-vis Robert Irsay's disposition. That's all anyone has ever heard. My entry digs deeper into the actual causes for the move in March of 84 and the contentious relationship Baltimore's leaders & press had with not only Robert Irsay but the team's previous owner as well. That is the real story for anyone not emotionally and often irrationally invested in the affair. 

Brian, there are two ways you can write a story...

 

Ugh...

 

If you just want to blame Baltimore...

 

It's not about assigning blame...as you are so keen to do...it is about finding out what the facts are. What the real motivation(s) behind the move were and why did it happen the way that it happened. Everything else is background noise/deflection.

 

I'm not sure I can change your mind.

 

That would be impossible. I now know why the team moved when it did and the way it did.

 

In a divorce, it takes two to tango.

 

And this flawed, assumptive reasoning goes to the heart of the error in your thinking. Divorce implies co-equals. Baltimore's authority vis-a-vis the Colts franchise was not equal to Robert Irsay's. The city had none. Irsay alone had that authority. And it was the thoroughly presumtuous actions of Baltimore & Maryland politicians in attempting to behave as if they had any authority over the franchise that provoked the move. There is nothing you can write to change that fact. At this point I suspect all you can do is add some colorful commentary on Robert Irsay's attitude and interactions with Baltimore's politicians and press. That's it. And all of it taken together will not amount to the actual reason(s) behind the move as much as it will simply explain the shallow excuses some have siezed in an attempt to gloss over their own failings. Either before, during or after the move. 

[braveheartcolt]

The vast majority of people who live on this earth do not care one jot about all this nonsense. A sports club moves from one town to another. Who cares.

[HarassedOffTheSite]

The vast majority of people who live on this earth do not care one jot about all this nonsense. A sports club moves from one town to another. Who cares.

 

The vast majority of people who live on this earth do not care about the Colts. Stop hating so hard.

[The Old Crow]

Because the move on March 28/29, 1984 was the direct result of their actions yet you've focused the bulk of your comments on Robert Irsay and his less than glowing personality. We've all heard this lazy, adolescently bitter canard ad nauseum when it comes to the move. His personality or lack thereof did not provoke the move. The attempt to steal the franchise via eminent domain laws did. And any narrative that does not focus there is a biased one. The politicians of Maryland and Baltimore were not culpable, they were responsible.

 

 

 

 

Because it not germane. The leaders in Indianapolis made very good business decisions because they desired to "host" an NFL franchise. Not own and administrate one. The leader's in Baltimore behaved as if the city had some sort of rights where the franchise (a private business) was concerned. And they acted accordingly (attempting to take ownership outright)...and that is why Baltimore lost the team in less than 24 hours, not Robert Irsay's disposition and not the very smart moves made in Indianapolis. Irsay and Indianapolis facilitated the move but the leaders in Baltimore and Maryland are responsible for it happening when it did and the way it did. That is a fact that is simply irrefutable. And that is why it is the focus of my attention.    

 

 

 

 

And that is all that it is; a "part" of the story. Not the story. I understand that you and many other citizens of Baltimore & Maryland want to make Irsay the story. It is easier that way. Placing the responsibility on him instead of a transparent self-examination of not only the actions of your leaders but also of the consequences of those actions. This is why you find my blog entry disagreeable....and it is also why you are incorrect.

 

 

 

 

 

Again, everyone is aware of the narrative vis-a-vis Robert Irsay's disposition. That's all anyone has ever heard. My entry digs deeper into the actual causes for the move in March of 84 and the contentious relationship Baltimore's leaders & press had with not only Robert Irsay but the team's previous owner as well. That is the real story for anyone not emotionally and often irrationally invested in the affair. 

 

 

 

Ugh...

 

 

 

 

It's not about assigning blame...as you are so keen to do...it is about finding out what the facts are. What the real motivation(s) behind the move were and why did it happen the way that it happened. Everything else is background noise/deflection.

 

 

 

 

That would be impossible. I now know why the team moved when it did and the way it did.

 

 

 

 

And this flawed, assumptive reasoning goes to the heart of the error in your thinking. Divorce implies co-equals. Baltimore's authority vis-a-vis the Colts franchise was not equal to Robert Irsay's. The city had none. Irsay alone had that authority. And it was the thoroughly presumtuous actions of Baltimore & Maryland politicians in attempting to behave as if they had any authority over the franchise that provoked the move. There is nothing you can write to change that fact. At this point I suspect all you can do is add some colorful commentary on Robert Irsay's attitude and interactions with Baltimore's politicians and press. That's it. And all of it taken together will not amount to the actual reason(s) behind the move as much as it will simply explain the shallow excuses some have siezed in an attempt to gloss over their own failings. Either before, during or after the move. 

 

 

Like Ronald Reagan once said, " There you go again ." More out of context comments, with your explanations. In your world nothing happened between 1972-1984 between Irsay and Maryland elected officials. Some guy in the Maryland legislature just popped up with an eminent domain bill out of thin air to screw over a businessman. Your narrative misses this whole story , which is a key element.

 

In an Indy Star article dated October 12th, 2012 by Mathew Tully, Mayor Hudnut admitted the Hoosier Dome was built to " lure," the Colts, not the benign word " host" that you used. When Indy lures a team they are good businessmen, when Baltimore does it, they are thieves.

 

I think most fair people in Baltimore and Indy realize there was blame to go around between our elected politicians , Irsay, and another city.

 

My point is your narrative only focuses on Baltimore's faults in the story, and glosses over the Irsays and Indy's part in the move,

 

I don't find your blog totally disagreeable. It's just a bit one-sided and conviently leaves out key elements of the story, to promote what you see as absolute truth. With you, there is no gray, it's all black and white.

 

I'm not too worried about blame almost 30 years later. Most of the facts you point out in your piece, I already knew. Remember, I lived through it.

[braveheartcolt]

The vast majority of people who live on this earth do not care about the Colts. Stop hating so hard.

You got hate from that? Wow. Indy / Baltimore. Just bricks and morter.

[ruksak]

Would 4 Peytons look weird? 

[The Old Crow]

You got hate from that? Wow. Indy / Baltimore. Just bricks and morter.

 

 

How are you a hater ? He know he's tagged me automatically as a hater because everyone from Baltimore is a hater. You just don't give a crap about the move, so I guess you're a hater also. If you don't care, or disagree with , " The Move to Indianapolis: The True Story, you must be a hater.

[HarassedOffTheSite]

If you don't care, or disagree with , " The Move to Indianapolis: The True Story, you must be a hater.

 

Or an emotionally undeveloped 5 year old.

[HarassedOffTheSite]

Would 4 Peytons look weird? 

 

All that forehead though.

[The Old Crow]

Or an emotionally undeveloped 5 year old.

 

So funny I forgot to laugh .