Looks like Leach has sanctioned media for reporting Marks injuury
- Thread starter ScottHood
- Start date
If it makes everyone feel better.......I was wrong to use Sandusky because his actions were so vile that they should have been reported regardless. My apologies for using an example that was so extreme.
You're new here. It's the offseason and the board is just getting warmed up. Hang in there, son. It'll get worse.
It is normal and accepted practice to demonstrate poor results from a poor procedure or situation by using extreme examples. The founding fathers did so abundantly when they compared King George to every tyrant known to man. Was he? No. But we have a govt of checks and balances. You really don't get it, do you?I've gotten your point for quite some time. The part you and Flat aren't doing is acknowledging that these analogies are extreme. With a world of situations that could be closely analogous, and he picks spousal abuse and sexual abuse by a college football coach. Other than what he says, CML has not shown any "power" than what any other coach has. He pulled interviews for a day! There are so many programs that don't even have open practice, at any point in the season. They have interviews once a week with people of the COACHES choice. How many interviews does CML have and how many practices are open? Even the closed practices can be watched via the library and CML knows it!
So your procedural concept is off. Show me where CML has too much power. Now, if you think someone speaking as he wishes (which I can guarantee CML doesn't) is "powerful" or "dangerous" or "authoritarian", well then… I can see we are at an impasse.
What it seems you and Flat are doing is looking into some crystal ball saying if CML has such power to pull interviews for a day (whoopee), that power will/can grow (or has grown) into a dictatorship and THEN we will get something like Penn State or USC Sanctions or whatever other analogy you guys pull out of your @$$. I am looking at facts. If there was some "power gauge" in the FCS, FBS, CML would be no where near the top. But the "analogy" is right on top of the "extreme gauge". You are looking into the future. I'm looking at fact.
Maybe Hitler, Pol Pot or Idi Amin could be other analogies you could pull out… Wasn't Hitler already brought up? They started out with very little power but that power grew. I think that is your point, right? That's the crux of your "comparison"? But you see the problem with that? Don't you think comparing Pol Pot to Mike Leach might be a BIT extreme? Well, that is what Flat did and you supported. The analogy might have been a football coach with no deaths in the thousands, but still as extreme as so many pointed out throughout this discussion. It is hyperbole to the hilt.
I'd like to stick with facts, not crystal ball crap and the supposition that CML will turn into the next Sandusky/Peterno IF he's given too much power.
For the comparison to be apt, all I have to demonstrate is that an array of problems can result from a situation in which one person has too much unchecked power. I was not trying to make the case that in every case extreme results will happen....but poor ones often do. So you are NOT getting what I am comparing, and you also have a false notion of what comparison are designed to do: they do NOT have to match on every point. You need to rethink your position.
Try this: I say driving drunk is bad, so I quote stats that bring out the point that XXXX drunk drivers killed XXXX people in 2015. You attempt to counter that argument by saying that "NOT EVERY DRUNK DRIVER KILLS PEOPLE, IN FACT, FEW ACTUALLY DO." Did you escape the force of my argument??
Nope.
Get it?
Drunk driving is analogous in that it creates a hazardous situation in which any number of bad things can happen....but, in all actuality, seldom do. The situation that was created is still dangerous.....so your attempts at mockery with using Hitler, etc. completely miss the point.
I guess the takeaway here is that the professor makes terrible analogies too.
No. That is what the word hyperbole is for which synonyms include embellishment, overkill, and exaggeration.
I had a long response. I'll try to keep this one shorter. Two points:
The reason the analogy for our forefathers was a decent one was because they hated the King. So going extreme in the analogy, worked.
2) But I am with Tron. How analogies are used, goes to motivation. Going extreme with them, is to insure being riled up. Look at your very examples. The forefathers wanted a rebellion and no one wants drunk drivers out there. But if you like the person, if you like the program, WHY would you pick such divisive analogies? Analogies are supposed to be as close to reality as possible. That's literally the definition. If you go to an extreme, it becomes propaganda and hyperbole.
I've asked multiple times, how CML has too much power or authority. Any more than a coach at Florida, Ohio State, Illinois, West Virginia, Witchita State, Eastern Washington or any other given program? THIS is the crux of this to me. If you can show me how he has displayed ANY power grab or the like, more than any other given program, I can give a little ground here. But right now, it's completely baseless. CML is well liked and these analogies put a very negative light on him… again with no basis. You've laid no foundation for the argument of "too much power".
It's only a matter of time before the public beheadings of Mike 'Idi Amin' Leach's enemies start taking place on the 50 yard line of Martin Stadium.
The drama club could use some of the posters we have here...
What's interesting about this thread is that while I was without a doubt guilty of hyperbole....you are just as guilty in your response to it. Take a minute to think about the comment and decide if it really was worth almost 100 responses.
It's the offseason, news is relatively light and we are all ready to see some hitting....so people are doing it virtually at this point.
I honestly can't remember if I even was a part of that 100+ comment whine-fest, besides advocating for discussing something else of course.
